Is EMG invasive or non-invasive procedure?

I was doing Kaplan test and it says it's a non-invasive procedure. I think Kaplan is wrong, isn't it?

I think it is actually condsidered a non invasive...I was not sure but as I read this post I happened to be on the phone with a suregon that I know...he said it is non invasive, even though I have heard it can be really painful.

I think there are two types of EMGs. One is invasive and painful while a newer version is non-invasive. On Loma Linda University Medical Center's patient teaching page, it states, "Impulses are recorded by attaching small disk electrodes to the skin surface over the muscle or by inserting needle electrodes into the muscle." So Kaplan must be testing to see if you know about the newer non-invasive test.

http://www.llu.edu/llumc/patvis/patedu.html

Thanks for posting. I learned something today.

It's considered non-invasive, just like an EKG/ECG would be.

If the skin is broken it is considered invasive. An EMG, or myography, is testing electrical impulses of the muscle by insertion of "needles"- this i would consider INVASIVE. Kaplan should differentiate which type of EMG, otherwise, it's invasive. I think they should review this question.

I have had one and I can tell you it is invasive, hurt like a biotch and bled rather a lot.

Strictly speaking it probably was not invasive as far as the hospital was concerned because they did not have me sign a consent.

They did do a multi-channel surface study first -- that was absolutely not invasive.

Kaplan should differentiate.

Yea, if the question included the information that informed consent was obtained then that would clue us in a bit more. IV's are invasive and no consent is required, excluding PICC. Difficult to differentiate, especially when studying for NCLEX.