-transparent.png){kind=logo}
Somatosensory evoked potentials were recorded for tactile stimuli applied to the fingers II and V as well as paravertebrally. The advantage of the painless mechanical stimuli is their specificity and the well defined stimulus localization. The question was therefore if the evoked responses are clearly demarcated. Nack potentials (N22: 22.5 and 22.3 ms) as well as cortical SEP's (P1: 33.2 and 32.8 ms) were easily to derive. It was also possible to get SEP's for segmental paravertebral tactile stimuli. For the finger stimulation an Erb's potential could not be recorded reliably.
Related Publications
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
January 1991,
Brain topography,
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
January 2006,
Brain research,
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
March 1986,
Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology,
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
October 2002,
Muscle & nerve,
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
November 1983,
Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology,
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
January 1982,
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
July 1994,
Neurology,
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
September 1985,
EEG-EMG Zeitschrift fur Elektroenzephalographie, Elektromyographie und verwandte Gebiete,
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
April 2011,
Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology,
D Claus, and
R Linsenmeier, and
U Sturm, and
A Engelhardt
September 1996,
Experimental brain research,
