4.6 Article

Characterization of micromachined spiked biopotential electrodes

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
Volume 49, Issue 6, Pages 597-604

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2002.1001974

Keywords

biopotential electrode; dry electrode; EEG; microneedle; microspike

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present the characterization of dry spiked biopotential electrodes and test their suitability to be used in anesthesia monitoring systems based on the measurement of electroencephalographic signals. The spiked electrode consists of an array of microneedles penetrating the outer skin layers. We found a significant dependency of the electrode-skin-electrode impedance (ESEI) on the electrode size (i.e., the number of spikes) and the coating material of the spikes. Electrodes larger than 3 x 3 mm(2) coated with Ag-AgCl have sufficiently low ESEI to be well suited for electroencephalograph (EEG) recordings. The maximum measured ESEI was 4.24 kOmega and 87 kOmega, at 1 kHz and 0.6 Hz, respectively. The minimum ESEI was 0.65 kOmega an 16 kOmega, at the same frequencies. The ESEI of spiked electrodes is stable over an extended period of time. The arithmetic mean of the generated dc offset voltage is 11.8 mV immediately after application on the skin and 9.8 mV after 20-30 min. A spectral study of the generated potential difference revealed that the ac part was unstable at frequencies below approximately 0.8 Hz. Thus, the signal does not interfere with a number of clinical applications using real-time EEG. Comparing raw EEG recordings of the spiked electrode with commercial Zipprep electrodes showed that both signals were similar. Due to the mechanical strength of the silicon microneedles and the fact that neither skin preparation nor electrolytic gel is required, use of the spiked electrode is convenient. The spiked electrode is very comfortable for the patient.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available