Comparison of electrode position marking procedures on the cranial surface

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionThe study aimed to compare the conventional method of electrode marking with a new system, EPlacement, to improve accuracy and reduce the time burden on health care professionals.MethodsTen health care professionals marked mannequin heads and adult volunteers using both methods. Time, accuracy, and usability of each method were analyzed. Three neurophysiological diagnostic tests were performed on mannequin heads: reversal pattern visual evoked potential (three electrodes required); somatosensory evoked potentials from the upper and lower extremities (five electrodes required); and standard intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring for spine surgery (nine electrodes required). Precision scanning of the mannequins with structured light and a printed hull were used to determine the actual locations of the electrodes of the 10/20 system.ResultsThe new method based on the EPlacement device represents an improvement on conventional tape measure (TM) marking and may be considered within the group of advanced methods such as navigation systems since it leads to improvements of 34% (1.7 mm) for electrode positions in the Nasion‐Inion and Left tragus–Right tragus lines and 77% (12.5 mm) for electrode positions using the approximate method. It reduces the time spent per test by an average of 1 min compared to the TM method. Health care staff survey results show a positive feedback regarding usability of the new method.ConclusionsThe study showed that the EPlacement device improves accuracy, reduces time, and is easy to use compared to the conventional method of electrode marking. The EPlacement method can facilitate the complex task of electrode marking and ultimately contribute to improved patient outcomes. It has the potential to be widely accepted and implemented in clinical practice.