CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,078Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringElectrochemical Analysis and ApplicationsTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine

Electrical stimulation of excitable tissue: design of efficacious and safe protocols

Merrill, Daniel R., Bikson, Marom, Jefferys, John G.R.·2005·Journal of Neuroscience Methods
DOI 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2004.10.020
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The physical basis for electrical stimulation of excitable tissue, as used by electrophysiological researchers and clinicians in functional electrical stimulation, is presented with emphasis on the fundamental mechanisms of charge injection at the electrode/tissue interface. Faradaic and non-Faradaic charge transfer mechanisms are presented and contrasted. An electrical model of the electrode/tissue interface is given. The physical basis for the origin of electrode potentials is given. Various methods of controlling charge delivery during pulsing are presented. Electrochemical reversibility is discussed. Commonly used electrode materials and stimulation protocols are reviewed in terms of stimulation efficacy and safety. Principles of stimulation of excitable tissue are reviewed with emphasis on efficacy and safety. Mechanisms of damage to tissue and the electrode are reviewed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2004.10.020

Cites

156 of 156 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Other pulse shapes might lead to different neural or behavioral responses.

    “For instance, all data used in this study to fit and validate the model used symmetric, biphasic pulse trains, while other pulse shapes might lead to different neural or behavioral responses (Merrill et al., 2005).”

    From Towards biologically plausible phosphene simulation for the differentiable optimization of visual cortical prostheses (2024) · cites this paper as Merrill et al., 2005

  • Electrical stimulation carries a higher level of safety risk than recording electrical activity and can result in both electrode and tissue damage.

    “A critical aspect of electrical stimulation is its higher level of safety risk compared to recording electrical activity, which can result in both electrode and tissue damage.”

    From Interfaces with the peripheral nervous system for the control of a neuroprosthetic limb: a review (2020) · cites this paper as [16]

  • Merrill et al. noted that a narrow pulse is desirable to decrease occurrence of electrochemical reactions and therefore reduce electrode degradation.

    “Similarly, Merrill et al. noted that a narrow pulse is desirable to decrease occurrence of electrochemical reactions, and therefore reduce electrode degradation [2].”

    From Safety of long-term electrical peripheral nerve stimulation: review of the state of the art (2019) · cites this paper as [2]

  • In terms of electrode corrosion, slightly unbalanced biphasic pulses might be advantageous.

    “In terms of electrode corrosion, however, slightly unbalanced biphasic pulses might be advantageous [2, 77].”

    From Safety of long-term electrical peripheral nerve stimulation: review of the state of the art (2019) · cites this paper as [2]

  • Charge injection at an electrode occurs through capacitive charge transfer, with no electron transfer across the electrode-electrolyte interface, and Faradaic charge transfer, where electron transfer and reduction and oxidation (redox) reactions occur.

    “Charge injection at an electrode occurs through capacitive charge transfer, with no electron transfer across the electrodeelectrolyte interface, and Faradaic charge transfer, where electron transfer and reduction and oxidation (redox) reactions occur [101], [114].”

    From Active Neural Interface Circuits and Systems for Selective Control of Peripheral Nerves: A Review (2024) · cites this paper as [101]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 159 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Merrill, D. R., Bikson, M., & Jefferys, J. G. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Utah (US)
  • City College of New York (US)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Merrill, Daniel R.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-02
Volume
141
Issue
2
Pages
171-198
ISSN
0165-0270 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jneumeth.2004.10.020
OpenAlex
W2153787766
Cited by
2,078
References
159
Citations by year
2026: 100 · 2025: 136 · 2024: 116 · 2023: 126 · 2022: 132 · 2021: 163 · 2020: 119 · 2019: 132 · 2018: 137 · 2017: 115 · 2016: 109 · 2015: 100 · 2014: 98 · 2013: 91 · 2012: 80
FWCI
2.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5f32ns045454-03)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (5F32NS045454)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Electrochemistry › Electrochemical Analysis and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Keywords
functional electrical stimulation, electrode-tissue interface, charge injection, Faradaic charge transfer, electrode potential, electrochemical reversibility, stimulation protocols, stimulation safety, tissue damage mechanisms, electrode damage, electrode materials
MeSH terms
Animals, Biomedical Engineering, Electric Stimulation, Electrochemistry, Electrodes, Electrolytes, Electrophysiology, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Equipment Design, Humans

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review