Inter- and intrasession reliability of psychophysiological poststress adaptation periods

Reliability of psychophysiological responding as a function of trait anxiety

This study examined the temporal stability of three psychophysiological responses (frontal electromyographic activity, hand surface temperature, and heart rate) recorded over four sessions (days 1, 2, 8, and 28) on 34 subjects, 17 with high Spielberger Trait Anxiety Inventory scores and 17 with low scores. Each session consisted of a 20-minute adaptation period, a baseline condition, and two stressors (one cognitive, the other physical). Two forms of reliability coefficients were employed, intraclass correlations and Pearson Product Moment; the two types of reliability coefficients arrived at the same conclusions. Results indicated that reliability coefficients for the two anxiety groups did not differ on frontal EMG or heart rate responses; however, hand surface temperature responding was considerably less reliable for high anxious individuals than low anxious individuals. Reliability coefficients on absolute scores were, for the most part, reliable. Treating the responses as relative measures (percent change from baseline or simple change scores from baseline) produced smaller and less reliable coefficients. Magnitudes of the three physiological responses did not significantly differ as a function of high or low trait anxiety. Findings are discussed in terms of their clinical, as well as basic psychophysiological, importance.

Temporal stability of psychophysiological stress profiles: a re-analysis using intraclass correlation coefficients

This is a re-analysis of data from a previous study which examined the temporal stability of three psychophysiological responses [frontal electromyographic activity (EMG), hand surface temperature, and heart rate]. Each response was recorded on 64 subjects over four sessions, each of which consisted of a 20-min, adaptation period, a baseline condition, and two stressors (one cognitive, the other physical). Rather than using Pearson product-moment correlations, as nearly all psychophysiological test-retest reliability studies have, we have now analyzed the data using intraclass correlation coefficients. This type of correlation allows one to incorporate more than two test-retest values on the same subjects. Analysis indicated that, with the exception of EMG during the physical stressor, the absolute values of the responses had quite significant reliability (.70 or greater). Treating the responses as relative measures (percent change from baseline or simple change scores from baseline) produced smaller and frequently less stable coefficients. It is concluded that statistical estimates of psychophysiological response reliability are functions of the design and particular reliability analysis employed.

Reliability of an ambulatory electromyographic activity device for musculoskeletal pain disorders

A number of investigators in recent years have called for the development of devices that can monitor surface EMG levels in individuals' normal environments for use with patients who suffer from disorders in which the etiology or maintenance of the pathology is presumed to be due at least in part to musculoskeletal dysfunction, such as low back pain, phantom limb pain and tension headache. This study examined the test-retest reliability of just such a device. Twenty-six healthy controls wore a lightweight (24 ounce) device which measured bilateral upper trapezius EMG, as well as peak and integral motion, for 5 consecutive days for up to 18 h each day. ANOVAs on the four measures revealed no difference between any of the four measures over the 5 days. Intra-class correlation coefficients for the two EMG variables across 5 days were both significant with alpha levels set at 0.01. The two EMG measures were highly correlated (r = 0.77); the two motion measures were also highly correlated (r = 0.60), but at a lower magnitude than EMG values; the relationship between EMG and motion was significant, but the magnitude of the between EMG motion correlations (0.26 and 0.35) were lower than the within EMG or motion ones. It was concluded that the test-retest reliability of the ambulatory monitoring device is within acceptable limits. Implications for the use of the device with musculoskeletal pain disorders--particularly headache--are discussed.

Effect of movement and position on muscle activity in tension headache sufferers during and between headaches

This paper presents the results of two studies. In the first, 20 tension headache subjects were evaluated in both a headache and non-headache state on bilateral trapezius and unilateral frontalis electromyographic activity during six positions: standing, bending from the waist, rising, sitting with back unsupported, sitting with back supported, and prone. Results indicated no effect of headache state on either measure. In a second study, 11 of the tension headache sufferers in Study One and 11 age-matched controls were compared on the same measures (controls were assessed two times, with a one-week duration separating evaluations). Results indicated a diagnosis by position interaction, with post-hoc tests revealing the muscle activity of tension headache sufferers to be considerably higher during the prone position than that of non-headache controls. Non-significant trends were found when examining the data for clinically significant abnormalities (90% of the headache sufferers were found to have significant clinical abnormalities).

Temporal stability of paraspinal electromyographic recordings in low back pain and non-pain subjects

This paper presents the results of two studies in which bilateral surface EMG recordings of paraspinal muscle tension were measured in 29 lower back pain and 20 normal subjects in 6 different positions (standing, bending from the waist, rising, sitting with back supported, sitting unsupported, prone) on two occasions, and a comparison of the data from both studies. Measures were highly reliable when examined using analysis of variance procedures. Statistically significant reliability coefficients were obtained when the absolute values of the measures were examined, although in some instances less than 20% of the variance was explained. When examined as relative [percent change from baseline (prone) condition] values, differences between the two groups were observed: the normals were statistically more reliable than lower back pain subjects during every condition. Implications for clinical work and both basic and applied research are discussed.