Work

A single-centre, randomised comparison of the performance and safety of a novel mechanomyography sensor with electromyography

Year: 2026

Type: article

Abstract: BACKGROUND: mechanosensor; MIPM, Mammendorf, Germany) compared with electromyography. METHODS: i.v. The primary endpoint was precision using the repeatability coefficient at baseline and full recovery. Precision of the TOF ratio measurement was assumed noninferior if the repeatability coefficient did not exceed a margin of 0.01. RESULTS: Mechanomyography had higher repeatability coefficients than electromyography at all measured TOF intervals. Mechanomyography was partially noninferior to electromyography because the 95% confidence interval of the median difference between TOF ratios of both techniques (0.039 [0.007 to 0.042]) covered the acceptable margin during baseline, but not after recovery to TOF ratio >0.9 (0.052 [0.047 to 0.076]). CONCLUSIONS: mechanosensor was not less precise than electromyography during baseline. Better hand fixation must be achieved to improve precision mechanomyography. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EUDAMED (CIV-23-06-043334); ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06230653).

Source: British Journal of Anaesthesia

DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2025.10.067

Authors: Anna S. Scholze, Bernhard Ulm, Nadine Kretsch, Bettina Jungwirth, Manfred Blobner, Flora T. Scheffenbichler

Institutions: TUM Klinikum, Technical University of Munich, Universität Ulm, Medical University of Vienna

Language: English

Topic: Anesthesia and Sedative Agents

Subfield: Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Field: Medicine

Domain: Health Sciences

SDG: Good health and well-being

Open Access status: hybrid

Estimated APC paid: $4,450