Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Sound comparison of seven TMS coils at matched simulation strength

View ORCID ProfileLari M. Koponen, Stefan M. Goetz, View ORCID ProfileAngel V. Peterchev
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/606418
Lari M. Koponen
aDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Lari M. Koponen
Stefan M. Goetz
aDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
bDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
cDepartment of Neurosurgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Angel V. Peterchev
aDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
bDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
cDepartment of Neurosurgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
dDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Angel V. Peterchev
  • For correspondence: angel.peterchev@duke.edu
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Accurate data on the sound emitted by various transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coils is lacking.

Methods We recorded the coil sound waveforms of seven coils. We estimated the neural stimulation strength by measuring the induced electric field and applying a strength–duration model to account for different waveforms.

Results At typical resting motor threshold (RMT), sound pressure level (SPL) at a distance of 25 cm varied 87– 111 dB(Z) across coils and the sound duration ranged 1–16 ms. At maximum stimulator output and 5-cm distance, SPL is estimated to be 110–139 dB(Z), and a 10-Hz-train of repetitive TMS (rTMS) would produce a continuous sound level of 87–109 dB(A).

Conclusions The sound of all tested coils was below, but near, relevant safety limits. The safety standards may be inadequate for risks specific to TMS. Therefore, we recommend hearing protection during TMS.

Highlights

  1. Coil click varies by 24 dB(Z) between different TMS coils for matched stimulation.

  2. Sound pressure level can exceed 120 dB(Z) even at 25 cm from TMS coil.

  3. Close to TMS coil, sound pressure level may reach nearly 140 dB(Z).

  4. For rTMS, continuous sound level may reach nearly 110 dB(A).

  5. Hearing protection is recommended during TMS, especially rTMS.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted April 12, 2019.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Sound comparison of seven TMS coils at matched simulation strength
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Sound comparison of seven TMS coils at matched simulation strength
Lari M. Koponen, Stefan M. Goetz, Angel V. Peterchev
bioRxiv 606418; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/606418
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Sound comparison of seven TMS coils at matched simulation strength
Lari M. Koponen, Stefan M. Goetz, Angel V. Peterchev
bioRxiv 606418; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/606418

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Neuroscience
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4382)
  • Biochemistry (9591)
  • Bioengineering (7090)
  • Bioinformatics (24858)
  • Biophysics (12611)
  • Cancer Biology (9956)
  • Cell Biology (14353)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7948)
  • Ecology (12105)
  • Epidemiology (2067)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15988)
  • Genetics (10925)
  • Genomics (14738)
  • Immunology (9869)
  • Microbiology (23661)
  • Molecular Biology (9484)
  • Neuroscience (50861)
  • Paleontology (369)
  • Pathology (1539)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2682)
  • Physiology (4013)
  • Plant Biology (8657)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1508)
  • Synthetic Biology (2394)
  • Systems Biology (6433)
  • Zoology (1346)