Microcurrent Waveforms
Peak amplitude (µA) is useless if the waveform doesn't penetrate the fascia. We put top devices on the oscilloscope.
When shopping for a microcurrent device, consumers look for the highest microamp (µA) number. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of electrical therapy. Clinical efficacy depends heavily on the shape of the waveform, the frequency (Hz), and the device's ability to maintain current under load.
The Oscilloscope Data
We tested three leading consumer devices across a standardized 100kΩ load (simulating human skin with standard conductive gel).
Device A (Square Wave)
Outputs a sharp, biphasic square wave. Square waves have rapid rise times, which is excellent for penetrating the stratum corneum and reaching the underlying muscle fascia. However, they can feel "prickly" or cause twitching if the amplitude is too high. This device maintained 320µA consistently.
Device B (Sine Wave)
Outputs a smooth sine wave. Sine waves are much more comfortable on the skin (less biting sensation), but their gradual rise time means they face more capacitive resistance from the skin. Much of the energy dissipates before reaching the muscle. The brand claims 400µA, but our oscilloscope recorded significant clipping, dropping to 150µA under load. Check our Impedance Tool.
The Takeaway
If you are using a device that struggles with impedance, your choice of conductive gel is critical. Read our Microcurrent Prep Protocol. Also see our Modality Stacking guide.