The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

29 protocols using d360 amplifier

1

Motor Evoked Potentials: Finger Extension

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Using Ag/AgCl surface electrodes via D360 amplifiers (Digitimer, UK), motor evoked potentials (MEP's, filtered between 3 and 3000 Hz) were recorded over three muscles involved in a finger extension (Darling and Cole, 1990 (link)) (Figure 1C), the FDI, thumb opponent (THU) and extensor digitorum (EXT) muscles. Signals were sampled at 10 kHz and stored via the CED1401. MEP amplitude and the level of background EMG (Thompson et al., 1991 (link)) (area/time from −80 to −10 ms relative to the TMS-pulse) were calculated with customized MatLab programmes (The Mathworks, USA). This procedure was repeated in Experiments 3 and 4.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Multimodal Neuromuscular Assessment Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
MEPs, EMG activity and SP evoked by stimulation were recorded with surface electrodes placed in the belly-tendon position with Digitimer Ltd. D360 amplifiers (gain 250, bandpass 3–3000 Hz). The first dorsal interosseous was the target muscle whose activity was recorded and sent to a CED Ltd. 1401mkII unit 1 (sampling at 10 kHz and storing signals); we also recorded activity from the extensor indicis. Finger movements were monitored using an electrogoniometer (S100) and finger force using a dynamometer (P200), both connected to a K800 amplifier (Biometrics Ltd.) and sent to CED1401mkII unit 1 for sampling (10 kHz) and storage. In parallel, the force signal was sent to another CED1401mkII (unit 2) run with Sequencer. Sequencer (sampling at 100 kHz) ran an algorithm (previously described in detail and validated8 (link)) to trigger TMS at MVC peak plateaus and percutaneous nerve stimulation in the resting muscle; the transistor-transistor logic (TTL) triggers from CED1401mkII unit 2 to the stimulators were also sent to CED1401mkII unit 1 as TTL markers to facilitate offline data processing.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Electromyography Analysis of Soleus Muscle

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Each subject was evaluated in a comfortable prone position. Surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded from the right soleus muscle by using adhesive electrodes (Ambu Blue Sensor SnapTab). The active electrode was located over the muscle belly and the reference electrode was located over the Achilles tendon (ground was attached over the proximal portion of the peroneal bone). The EMG was amplified (gain x1000) and band-pass filtered (1Hz to 3 kHz) by Digitimer D360 amplifiers (Digitimer Ltd., Welwyn Garden City, Herts, UK). Signals were recorded at a sampling rate of 10 kHz and stored on the computer for later analysis by Signal software (Cambridge Electronic Design Ltd., Cambridge, UK) through a power 1401 data acquisition interface (Cambridge Electronic Design Ltd., Cambridge, UK). All assessments were performed with the muscle at rest. The EMG background was continuously monitored and traces showing EMG activity were discarded online or offline. To obtain the H reflex, we used a constant current stimulator (DS7A, Digitimer, Welwyn, UK) to apply stimuli of 1 ms pulse width to the tibial nerve. For tibial nerve stimulation, the active electrode was placed in the popliteal fossa (cathodal current) and reference electrode was attached on the skin over the patella through adhesive electrodes (Ambu Blue Sensor SnapTab).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Standardized Lower Limb EMG Measurement Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The participants were seated in a comfortable chair with a backrest and a headrest. The angle of the hip joint in the sitting position was set such that it ranged from 70 to 80 degrees of flexion, the knee was set at 70–80 degrees of flexion, and the ankle was maintained at 10 degrees of plantar flexion using a rigid ankle brace. Electromyography (EMG) was performed using Ag/AgCl-plated surface electrodes (diameter 1 cm) placed 2 cm apart over the tested muscles in the right lower limb. EMG data were obtained from the soleus (SOL, for RI and TMS tests) and tibialis anterior (TA, for TMS tests) muscles. The EMG data were amplified and band-pass filtered (3 Hz to 2 kHz) using Digitimer D360 amplifiers (Digitimer Ltd., Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom). Signals were recorded at a sampling rate of 5 kHz using a Power 1401 data acquisition interface (Cambridge Electronic Design Ltd., Cambridge, United Kingdom), and stored on the computer for subsequent analysis using Signal software (Cambridge Electronic Design Ltd., Cambridge, United Kingdom). The EMG activity was monitored online. If the muscle was not fully relaxed, the trial was rejected and performed over again.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

TMS Protocol for Evaluating Corticomotor Excitability

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We used a Magstim 2002 stimulator connected to a figure‐of‐eight coil (diameter 90 mm) through a BiStim (Magstim Co). Single TMS pulses were applied over the hand area of left motor cortex (M1) to elicit motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in the right first digital interosseous (FDI) muscle, recorded using surface EMG (20 Hz to 2 kHz; D360 amplifier, Digitimer, Hertfordshire, UK). Resting motor threshold (RMT), active motor threshold (AMT), and short‐interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) were measured. RMT was determined using the relative frequency method.15, 16 AMT was recorded while subjects squeezed a manometer at 20% of maximum contraction. SICI was measured using stimuli pairs at interstimulus interval of 2 msec, with 15 conditioning stimulus at 80% AMT and 15 test stimulus 120% RMT.17 The position of the FDI hotspot was marked with a felt tip pen on the EEG cap to ensure constant coil placement throughout an experimental session. Furthermore, coil position and orientation relative to the marked position were carefully monitored by the experimenter throughout stimulation and corrected if necessary (i.e., if the participant moved). Importantly, the double‐blind design ensured that no systematic error could be introduced.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

DBS Recordings of OCD and MDD Patients

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All patients were studied within 2–7 days after initial DBS surgery, while the DBS leads were externalised. There was no difference in timing of recordings between OCD (5 ± 0.5 days) and MDD (4.9 ± 0.9 days) patients in Leuven (average timing for Berlin was 2.7 ± 0.3 days). LFPs were obtained bipolarly from the adjacent contacts of the DBS macroelectrode (01, 12, 23), amplified (×50 000) and filtered at 1–250 Hz. For patients 1–7 (Berlin), a D360 amplifier was used (Digitimer, Hertfordshire, UK) and signals were recorded at a sampling rate of 1 kHz through a 1401 A-D converter (CED, Cambridge UK) onto a computer using Spike2 (CED) software. For patients 8–19 (Leuven), we used a portable amplifier (Biopotential Analyzer Diana, St Petersburg, Russia) with sampling frequency 1.5 kHz (except for MDD cases 9 and 10, which were recorded with an older version of the recording system and therefore sampled at 185 Hz). Overall, 42 CG25 and 72 BNST contact pairs were recorded from 38 electrodes in 19 patients. All patients completed rest recordings of at least 100 s duration (127 ± 1.5 s for CG25 and 137 ± 8.8 s for BNST, mean ± s.e.m.). During recordings, patients were seated comfortably in an armchair and asked to relax with eyes open, and not to speak.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Electromyographic Recordings of Muscles

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
EMG was recorded contralaterally, in different experimental sessions, from the DAO, FDI and UT muscles, using 9 mm diameter Ag-AgCl surface electrodes. For EMG recordings from the DAO, the active electrode was placed at the midpoint between the angle of the mouth and the lower border of the mandible, the reference electrode over the mandible border, 1 cm below the active electrode and the ground electrode over the right forehead (Pilurzi et al, 2013) (link). For EMG recordings from the FDI, the active electrode was placed over the muscle belly, the reference electrode at the second finger metacarpo-phalangeal joint and the ground electrode over the forearm (Farbert et al., 1992; Rossini et al., 2014) .
For the UT EMG recording, the active and reference electrode were placed 3 cm apart over UT with a distance of 3 cm between each other's and the ground on the sternum (Matthews et al., 2013) (link). Unrectified EMG signals were recorded (D360 amplifier, Digitimer Ltd, Welwyn Garden City, UK), amplified (x1000), filtered (bandpass 3-3000 Hz), sampled (5 kHz per channel; window frame length: 250 ms) using a 1401 power analog-to-digital converter (Cambridge Electronic Design, Cambridge, UK) and Signal 6 software on a computer and stored for off-line analysis.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Facial EMG Measurement Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We recorded the EMG activity from the OO muscles of both sides using a pair of surface electrodes per side, with the active electrode on the lower eyelid and the reference electrode 3 cm away on the lateral canthus (Figure 1) [34 (link),35 (link)]. A square electrode (32 × 32 mm) was positioned on the forehead as a ground electrode. The EMG raw signals were amplified and bandpass-filtered (20 Hz–3 kHz) by a Digitimer D360 amplifier (Digitimer Ltd., Welwyn Garden City, Herts, UK), that digitized at a sampling rate of 5 kHz (CED 1401 laboratory interface; Cambridge Electronic Design, UK), and was stored on a laboratory computer for online visual display. The data were analyzed offline with dedicated software (Signal software; Cambridge Electronic Design) [16 (link),36 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Multimodal Neural Dynamics of Wrist Movement

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The angular position of the non-dominant wrist was sampled at 100 Hz and sent to the computer for storage and offline analysis. Scalp EEG was continuously recorded at 2084 Hz by 64 electrodes mounted on an elastic cap. Electrodes were evenly distributed over the scalp according to the international 10–20 EEG system (ANT Neuro, Asalab, The Netherlands). The impedance was kept below ≤5 kΩ and the EEG signal was re-referenced to Cz during recording. The timing of the visual cue (blue target) in the motor task was marked in the simultaneous EEG recording, with separate markers for each condition (flexion, extension). Muscle activity was monitored by surface electromyography (EMG) using bipolar electrodes in a belly-tendon montage placed on the wrist extensor (extensor carpi radialis longus) and flexor (flexor carpi radialis) muscles of the non-dominant arm. The raw EMG signal was amplified and band-pass filtered (10 Hz to 500 Hz; D360 amplifier, Digitimer, Hertfordshire, UK) and digitized at an A/D rate of 1 kHz per channel (CED Micro 1401, Cambridge Electronic Design, Cambridgeshire, UK).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Multimodal Neurophysiological Recordings

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
EEG and EMG signals were acquired at a high sampling rate of 20 kHz using a D360 amplifier (Digitimer) in combination with a 1401 A/D converter (Cambridge Electronic Design). The ground Ag/AgCl electrode was placed on the left forearm. EEG signals were recoded from Cz, C3, CP3, and CPz referenced to the average of the two mastoids (M1 and M2). EMG signals were recorded with the same amplifier from only the rFDI. Four active electrodes were placed on the muscle belly and referenced to the electrode placed on the first phalanx of the index finger (see Fig. 1B). EMG signals were band-pass filtered between 10 Hz and 10 kHz.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!