Electromyography: do the diagnostic ends justify the means?

Milind J. Kothari, David C. Preston, George M. Plotkin, Swamy Venkatesh, Jeremy M. Shefner, Eric L. Logigian

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

29 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Physicians are sometimes reluctant to refer patients for electrodiagnostic studies (electromyography with nerve conduction studies [EMG/NCS]) believing the test is too painful and of little benefit. Methods: We performed two separate surveys on 126 and 100 consecutive patients referred to our laboratory to determine if EMG/NCS was beneficial to the referring physician and to compare the level of anxiety experienced by patients before the study with the pain actually experienced during the study. Results: The electrodiagnosis was discordant from the referring diagnosis in 39% of the patients with an abnormal EMG/NCS. Pretest anxiety levels were low in 59% of the patients, medium in 27%, and high in 14%. After the tests, 82% of the patients said that the test was not as bad as expected, and was generally only mildly painful. Ninety-three responded that they would have the test performed again. Conclusions: EMG/NCS often suggest alternative diagnoses, and the actual pain experienced during an EMG/NCS study is significantly less than expected.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)947-949
Number of pages3
JournalArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume76
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 1995

    Fingerprint

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
  • Rehabilitation

Cite this

Kothari, M. J., Preston, D. C., Plotkin, G. M., Venkatesh, S., Shefner, J. M., & Logigian, E. L. (1995). Electromyography: do the diagnostic ends justify the means? Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 76(10), 947-949. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(95)80072-7