Primary Image

RehabMeasures Instrument

Manual Muscle Test

Last Updated

Purpose

MMT is a standardized set of assessments that measure muscle strength and function.

Link to Instrument

Instrument Details

Acronym MMT

Area of Assessment

Strength

Assessment Type

Performance Measure

Cost

Free

CDE Status

Availability
Please visit this website for more information about the instrument:   Manual Muscle Testing- Using the Medical Research Council Muscle Grading Scale
Classification
Core: Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and Neuromuscular Disease (NMD)
 
Supplemental-Highly Recommended for Congenital Muscular Dystrophy (CMD), Myotonic Muscular Dystrophy (DM), Facioscapulohumeral Muscular Dystrophy (FSHD)
 
Supplemental: Cerebral Palsy (CP), Duchenne/Becker Muscular Dystrophy (DMD/BMD), Mitochondrial Disease (Mito) and Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA)

Diagnosis/Conditions

  • Spinal Cord Injury

Key Descriptions

  • Score range 0-5, minimum 0, maximum 5/5.
  • There are three manual muscle tests grading systems:
    1) The Medical Research Council Scale
    2) Daniels and Worthingham
    3) Kendall and McCreary

Number of Items

Determined by the number of muscles being tested

Time to Administer

Less than 1 minutes

Required Training

No Training

Age Ranges

Infant

0 - 2

years

Preschool Children

2 - 5

years

Child

6 - 12

years

Adolescent

13 - 17

years

Adult

18 - 64

years

Elderly Adult

+

years

Instrument Reviewers

Initially reviewed by Wendy Romney PT, DPT, NCS, Cara Weisbach, PT, DPT, and the SCI EDGE task force of the Neurology Section of the APTA in 7/2012.

Reviewed in 2020 by Ali Baumgarten OTS, Jumai Hariran OTS, Kaily Nagel OTS, & Kristina Nguyen OTS

Body Part

Neck
Upper Extremity
Lower Extremity
Back

ICF Domain

Body Structure
Body Function

Measurement Domain

Motor

Professional Association Recommendation

Recommendations for use of the instrument from the Neurology Section of the American Physical Therapy Association’s Multiple Sclerosis Taskforce (MSEDGE), Parkinson’s Taskforce (PD EDGE), Spinal Cord Injury Taskforce (SCI EDGE), Stroke Taskforce (StrokEDGE), Traumatic Brain Injury Taskforce (TBI EDGE), and Vestibular Taskforce (Vestibular EDGE) are listed below. These recommendations were developed by a panel of research and clinical experts using a modified Delphi process.

For detailed information about how recommendations were made, please visit:  http://www.neuropt.org/go/healthcare-professionals/neurology-section-outcome-measures-recommendations

Abbreviations:

 

HR

Highly Recommend

R

Recommend

LS / UR

Reasonable to use, but limited study in target group  / Unable to Recommend

NR

Not Recommended

Recommendations for use based on acuity level of the patient:

 

Acute

(CVA < 2 months post)

(SCI < 1 month post)

(Vestibular < 6 weeks post)

Subacute

(CVA 2 to 6 months)

(SCI 3 to 6 months)

Chronic

(> 6 months)

SCI EDGE

R

R

R

Recommendations based on SCI AIS Classification:

 

AIS A/B

AIS C/D

SCI EDGE

R

R

Recommendations for entry-level physical therapy education and use in research:

 

Students should learn to administer this tool? (Y/N)

Students should be exposed to tool? (Y/N)

Appropriate for use in intervention research studies? (Y/N)

Is additional research warranted for this tool (Y/N)

SCI EDGE

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not reported

Considerations

  • MMT may not be sufficiently sensitive to measure strength in good and normal range. (Schwartz et al, 1992)
  • Herbison et al (1996) and Schwartz et al (1992) found significant differences in strength change over time using myometry that were not detected with manual muscle testing with strength grades greater than 3.5.

Do you see an error or have a suggestion for this instrument summary? Please e-mail us!

Spinal Injuries

back to Populations

Interrater/Intrarater Reliability

Spinal Cord Injury:

(Herbison et al, 1996, = 88, C4-C8 AIS A-D, 0-2 years post injury, measured C5 elbow flexor strength)

  • Excellent interrater reliability (ICC = 0.94)

Construct Validity

Convergent Validity

 

SCI:

(Schwartz et al, 1992, = 122)

Correlation between MMT and Myometry: Time post SCI

 

 

 

 

 

 

Muscle

72 hours

1 week

1 month

3 months

6 months

12 months

L bicep

0.86**

= 31

0.84**

= 30

0.68**

= 37

0.82**

= 33

0.59*

= 24

0.42*

= 20

R bicep

0.80**

= 29

0.83**

= 29

0.79**

= 26

0.68**

= 34

0.59*

= 23

0.18

= 20

L ECR

0.92**

= 15

0.86**

= 22

0.81**

= 30

0.84**

= 21

0.84**

= 16

0.77**

= 18

R ECR

0.94**

= 18

0.78**

= 19

0.93**

= 26

0.79**

= 24

0.75**

= 17

0.71**

= 17

** = Excellent correlation > 0.6

* = Adequate correlation 0.31-0.59

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SCI:

(Noreau, Vachon, 1998, n = 38 level of injury C5-L3, AIS A-D)

Spearman Correlation Coefficients between MMT and Myometry

 

 

 

 

Muscles

Paraplegia at Admit (= 23)

Paraplegia at Discharge (= 23)

Tetraplegia at Admit (= 15)

Tetraplegia at Discharge (= 15)

Elbow flexors

0.48*

0.26

0.58**

0.48*

Elbow extensors

0.46*

0.55*

0.95**

0.88**

Shoulder flexors

0.63**

0.60**

0.83**

0.50*

Shoulder extensors

0.44*

0.49*

0.67**

0.57*

Shoulder abductors

0.64**

0.57*

0.55*

0.59*

Shoulder adductors

0.67**

0.34*

0.84**

0.73**

** = Excellent correlation > 0.6

* = Adequate correlation 0.31-0.59

 

 

 

 

Osteoarthritis

back to Populations

Standard Error of Measurement (SEM)

Osteoarthritis (OA):

(Youdas et al, 2010; n = 20 subjects with OA and 20 healthy subjects; mean age = 53.4(9.0) for subjects with OA and 50.4(7.2) for healthy subjects)

  • SEM for right side MMT using handheld dynanometer (HHD) = 1%
  • SEM for left side MMT using handheld dynanometer (HHD) = 2%

Minimal Detectable Change (MDC)

Osteoarthritis (OA):

(Youdas et al, 2010)

  • MDC for right side MMT using handheld dynanometer (HHD) = 4%
  • MDC for left side MMT using handheld dynanometer (HHD) = 4%

Test/Retest Reliability

Osteoarthritis (OA):

(Youdas et al, 2010)

  • Excellent test-retest reliability for right side (ICC = 0.98)
  • Excellent test-retest reliability for left side (ICC = 0.97)

Responsiveness

Osteoarthritis (OA):

(Youdas et al, 2010)

  • Sensitivity = 0.35
  • Specificity = 0.90
  • Positive likelihood ratio = 3.5

Non-Specific Patient Population

back to Populations

Normative Data

Trapezius Muscle: (Cibulka et al., 2013; n = 11; mean age = 20-31 (23.8) years; mean height 173.9 cm, mean weight 76.2 kg, mean body mass index of 25.0 (SD = 2.2))

The mean and SD for normalized percentages of maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) for the new trapezius MMT.

Muscle

% Mean MVIC

SD

Upper trapezius

160.84

58.78

Middle trapezius

59.23

21.21

Lower trapezius

47.54

14.86

The mean and SD’s torque for upper, middle, lower, and new trapezius muscles. These were measured with a Microfet 2 Dynamometer in kilograms.

 

Muscle test

Mean Torque (kg)

SD

Upper trapezius

9.0

1.8

Middle trapezius

4.2

1.3

Lower trapezius

4.1

1.6

New trapezius

5.8

1.8

 

Test/Retest Reliability

Trapezius Muscle: (Cibulka et al., 2013)

  • Excellent test-retest reliability:
    • Upper trapezius testing: (ICC = 0.88 [95% CI: 0.62-0.97])
    • Middle trapezius testing: (ICC = 0.94 [95% CI: 0.78-0.98])
    • Lower trapezius testing: (ICC = 0.89 [95% CI: 0.560-0.97])
    • New trapezius testing: (ICC = 0.92 [95% CI: 0.70-0.98])

Interrater/Intrarater Reliability

ICU survivors and simulated patients:

(Fan et al, 2010, = 19, 26 muscle groups, 19 clinicians)

  • Adequate to Excellent overall interrater reliability of Upper extremity muscles (ICC = 0.62-1.00)
  • Adequate to Excellent overall interrater reliability of Lower Extremity muscles (ICC = 0.66-1.00)

Musculoskeletal Conditions

back to Populations

Standard Error of Measurement (SEM)

Myositis (Pfister et al., 2018; n=46)

  • SEM using intrarater reliability was 1.8% (2.5)
  • SEM using interrater reliability was 2.2% (3.1)

Minimally Clinically Important Difference (MCID)

Myositis (Pfister et al., 2018; n=46)

  • MDC using intrarater reliability = 4.9% (6.9)
  • MDC using interrater reliability = 6.2% (8.6)

Normative Data

Myositis (Pfister et al., 2018; n=46)

MMT8 total score mean (+/-SD)

  • Measurement 1 = 70+/-8
  • Measurement 2 = 71+/-7
  • Measurement 3 = 72+/-7

Interrater/Intrarater Reliability

Myositis (Pfister et al., 2018; n=46)

  • Excellent Intrarater reliability ICC (95%CI) = 0.94 (0.90-0.97)
  • Excellent Interrater reliability ICC (95%CI) = 0.91 (0.83-0.95)

 

Inflammatory Myopathies: (Rider, L.G. et al., 2010; n=73 children, 45 adults; mean age=10.2 (5.6), 42 (17.2) years; using Kendall’s 0-10 point scale)

 

  • Excellent intrarater reliability for juvenile IIM: ICC range from 0.84-0.95
  • Adequate interrater reliability for juvenile IIM: ICC range from 0.68-0.76

Internal Consistency

Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies (IIM): (Rider, L.G. et al., 2010; n=73 children, 45 adults; mean age=10.2 (5.6), 42 (17.2) years; using Kendall’s 0-10 point scale)

  • Excellent internal consistency for total MMT for juvenile IIM (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97) and adult IIM (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93)
  • Excellent internal consistency for proximal MMT for juvenile IIM (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.96) and adult IIM (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93)
  • Excellent internal consistency for MMT6 subset #118 for juvenile IIM (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.85)
  • Adequate internal consistency for MMT6 subset #118 for adult IIM (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.78)
  • Adequate to excellent internal consistency for MMT8 subsets (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.78-0.91)

Description of muscle groups and their percentage MMT score values in juvenile and adult patients with IIM*

MMT score

Muscle groups included in score

Juvenile IIM (n = 73)

Adult IIM (n = 45)

Total MMT

Neck flexors, neck extensors, trapezius, deltoid, biceps, iliopsoas, gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, quadriceps, wrist flexors, wrist extensors, ankle dorsiflexors, ankle plantar flexor

88.3 (79.0, 94.1)

78.2 (73.1, 84.0)

Proximal MMT

Trapezius, deltoid, biceps, iliopsoas, gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, quadriceps

87.6 (78.7, 94.2)

72.4 (66.3, 81.2)

MMT6 subset #118§

Neck extensors, trapezius, gluteus maximus, iliopsoas, wrist extensors, ankle dorsiflexors

86.7 (78.0, 94.3)

80.0 (74.3, 85.9)

MMT8 subsets

     

 Subset #13

Neck flexors, trapezius, deltoid, gluteus maximus, iliopsoas, quadriceps, wrist flexors, ankle dorsiflexors

86.8 (77.1, 92.7)

78.5 (71.7, 81.6)

 Subset #55

Neck flexors, deltoid, biceps, gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, quadriceps, wrist flexors, ankle dorsiflexors

87.5 (76.6, 92.3)

76.8 (70.1, 81.3)

 Subset #58

Neck flexors, deltoid, biceps, gluteus maximus, gluteus medius, quadriceps, wrist extensors, ankle dorsiflexors

86.8 (76.4, 92.5)

76.5 (69.7, 80.9)

 Subset #88

Neck extensors, trapezius, deltoid, gluteus maximus, iliopsoas, quadriceps, wrist extensors, ankle dorsiflexors

87.5 (79.6, 94.4)

79.0 (72.8, 84.1)

 Subset #133

Neck extensors, deltoid, biceps, gluteus maximus, iliopsoas, quadriceps, wrist flexors, ankle dorsiflexors

87.3 (77.1, 94.8)

77.3 (71.1, 81.8)

 Subset #136

Neck extensors, deltoid, biceps, gluteus maximus, iliopsoas, quadriceps, wrist extensors, ankle dorsiflexors

87.3 (76.7, 94.4)

77.3 (70.1, 81.8)

 Subset #142

Neck extensors, deltoid, biceps, gluteus medius, iliopsoas, quadriceps, wrist extensors, ankle dorsiflexors

89.0 (78.4, 94.3)

78.5 (70.3, 83.4)

  • * Values are the median (25th, 75th percentiles). Scores are expressed as a percentage of the maximum potential score. MMT = manual muscle testing score; IIM = idiopathic inflammatory myopathies; MMT6 = 6 muscle group MMT.
  • † Proximal and distal muscle groups tested bilaterally; maximum potential score = 240.
  • ‡ Muscle groups tested bilaterally; maximum potential score = 140.
  • § Muscle groups tested unilaterally on the right side; maximum potential score = 60.
  • ¶ Muscle groups tested unilaterally on the right side; maximum potential score = 80.

Construct Validity

Myositis (Pfister et al., 2018; n=50; mean age=56 (14.0) years; time since diagnosis=36 (18) months)

  • Excellent convergent validity between MMT with averaged force of hand-held dynameter of shoulder abduction (r = 0.85), neck flexion (r = 0.62), and hip abduction (r = 0.61)
  • Adequate convergent validity between MMT with averaged force of hand-held dynameter of elbow flexion (r = 0.55)
  • Poor convergent validity between MMT with averaged force of hand-held dynameter of wrist extension (r = .27), knee extension (r = 0.28), ankle extension (r = 0.24), and hip extension (r = 0.28)
  • Excellent convergent validity between MMT with normalized force of hand-held dynameter of shoulder abduction (r = 0.75) and hip abduction (r = 0.65)
  • Adequate convergent validity between MMT with normalized force of hand-held dynameter of elbow flexion (r = 0.54), neck flexion (r = 0.57), and hip extension (r = 0.38)
  • Poor convergent validity between MMT with normalized force of hand-held dynameter of wrist extension (r = 0.19), knee extension (r = 0.27), and ankle extension (r = 0.09)

Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies (IIM): (Rider, L.G. et al., 2010; n=73 children, 45 adults; mean age=10.2 (5.6), 42 (17.2) years; using Kendall’s 0-10 point scale)

  • Excellent correlation between Total and Proximal MMT scores in juvenile IIM with distal and axial MMT scores (rs =0.73–0.88, P < 0.000)
  • Adequate to excellent correlation between Total and Proximal MMT scores in adult PM/DM with distal and axial MMT scores (rs= 0.40 – 0.74, P < 0.008).
  • Adequate correlation Total and Proximal MMT scores in adult PM/DM correlated with lactate dehydrogenase (rs = -0.45 to -0.50, P = 0.007–0.016).
  •  Adequate correlation with creatine kinase (CK), aldolase, and aspartate aminotransferase (rs = -0.30 to -0.38, P = 0.012–0.055).
  • Adequate correlation between Prednisone dose with Total, Proximal, and best MMT subset scores in juvenile IIM (rs = -0.33 to -0.39, P  ≥ 0.005)
  • Poor correlation between Prednisone dose with Total, Proximal, and best MMT subset scores in adult PM/DM (rs = -0.11 to -0.22, P > 0.18)
  • Adequate correlation between total MMT and Physician Global Activity for juvenile IIM (rs = -0.54) and adult IIM (rs = -0.33)
  • Excellent correlation between total MMT with Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (rs = -0.62), Childhood Myositis Assessment Scale (rs = 0.70), and Convery activities of daily living (rs = 0.63)
  • Adequate correlation between total MMT with MRI STIR + T1-weighted average for juvenile IIM (rs = -0.48) and adult IIM (rs = -0.43)
  • Poor to adequate correlation between total MMT and creatine kinase in juvenile IIM (rs = -0.16) and in adult IIM (rs = -0.34)
  •  

Convergent construct validity (rs) of MMT scores with measures of myositis activity and damage*

MMT score

Total MMT

Proximal MMT

Physician Global Activity

C‐HAQ

ADL

CMAS

MRI STIR + T1‐weighted average

Creatine kinase

Juvenile IIM (n = 73)

Adult IIM (n = 45)

Juvenile IIM (n = 73)

Adult IIM (n = 45)

Juvenile IIM (n = 73)

Adult IIM (n = 44)

Juvenile IIM (n = 58)

Adult IIM (n = 45)

Juvenile IIM (n = 69)

Juvenile IIM (n = 31)

Adult IIM (n = 45)

Juvenile IIM (n = 73)

Adult IIM (n = 45)

Total MMT

1.0

1.0

0.96

0.91

−0.54

−0.33

−0.62

0.63

0.70

−0.48

−0.43

−0.16

−0.34

Proximal MMT

0.96

0.91

1.00

1.00

−0.47

−0.34

−0.59

0.70

0.73

−0.48

−0.50

−0.12

−0.38

MMT6 subset #118

0.97

0.95

0.92

0.81

−0.54

−0.31

−0.68

0.61

0.71

−0.49

−0.43

−0.13

−0.36

MMT8 subsets

                         

 Subset #13

0.98

0.96

0.96

0.87

−0.48

−0.39

−0.61

0.55§

0.71

−0.45

−0.45

−0.16

−0.43

 Subset #55

0.98

0.96

0.95

0.91

−0.48

−0.37

−0.62

0.57§

0.69

−0.45

−0.45

−0.13

−0.37

 Subset #58

0.98

0.96

0.95

0.91

−0.49

−0.37

−0.64

0.59

0.70

−0.45

−0.46

−0.13

−0.36

 Subset #88

0.98

0.97

0.95

0.89

−0.50

−0.34

−0.66

0.63

0.73

−0.47

−0.42

−0.12

−0.37

 Subset #133

0.99

0.98

0.95

0.90

−0.51

−0.34

−0.63

0.62

0.69

−0.47

−0.44

−0.14

−0.38

 Subset #136

0.98

0.97

0.94

0.90

−0.51

−0.34

−0.63

0.64

0.69

−0.48

−0.45

−0.15

−0.38

 Subset #142

0.98

0.96

0.94

0.91

−0.49

−0.33

−0.60

0.66

0.67

−0.45

−0.44

−0.15

−0.33

  • < 0.0001 unless otherwise indicated. MMT = manual muscle testing; C‐HAQ = Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire; ADL = Convery activities of daily living; CMAS = Childhood Myositis Assessment Scale; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; IIM = idiopathic inflammatory myopathy; MMT6 = 6 muscle group MMT. See Table 2 for testing methodology.
  • † = 0.001–0.05.
  • ‡ > 0.05.

§ = 0.0001–0.0009.

Content Validity

Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies (IIM): (Rider, L.G. et al., 2010; n=73 children, 45 adults; mean age=10.2 (5.6), 42 (17.2) years; using Kendall’s 0-10 point scale)

Content validity of the MMT was determined by a panel of expert pediatric and adult PTs, and Rheumatologists experienced in evaluating myositis. Each expert ranked items quantitatively and qualitatively and recorded whether a particular muscle group could not be tested accurately.  From the results of this panel, concluded that the instrument has strong content validity (Rider, L.G. et al., 2010).

Face Validity

Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies (IIM): (Rider, L.G. et al., 2010; n=73 children, 45 adults; mean age=10.2 (5.6), 42 (17.2) years; using Kendall’s 0-10 point scale)

Rider, L.G. (2010) states that, “The top-rated 8 muscle group subsets also had acceptable face validity, included frequently involved muscle groups, and were felt to be easier to test, even in patients with joint contractures or calcinosis. However, they require prospective validation, including in therapeutic trials, to further define their performance characteristics in other populations (p. 471).”

Floor/Ceiling Effects

Myositis (Pfister et al., 2018; n=50; mean age=56 (14.0) years; time since diagnosis=36 (18) months)

  • Adequate ceiling effects of <5% for total score
  • Poor ceiling effects of 22-82% for various muscle groups

Responsiveness

Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies (IIM): (Rider, L.G. et al., 2010; n=73 children, 45 adults; mean age=10.2 (5.6), 42 (17.2) years; using Kendall’s 0-10 point scale)

Standardized response means for Total MMT was 0.56 in juvenile IIM and 0.75 in patients with adult PM/DM. Using relative efficiencies, the Proximal MMT score was slightly less responsive relative to the Total MMT score in juvenile IIM, but slightly more responsive in adults with PM/DM (Rider, L.G. et al., 2010).

  •  Relative efficiency of MMT subgroups were found (>0.90)

Pediatric Disorders

back to Populations

Standard Error of Measurement (SEM)

Children with Spina Bifida (Mahoney et al., 2009; n=20; mean age = 9 years and 10 months)

Muscle Group

SEM

Hip Flexors

0.4

Hip Abductors

0.5

Knee Extensors

0.5

Minimal Detectable Change (MDC)

Children with Spina Bifida (Mahoney et al., 2009; n=20; mean age = 9 years and 10 months)

The 90% confidence level was chosen. Therefore, the MDC represents the change needed to be 90% confident that actual change occurred.

Muscle Group

MDC 90%

Hip Flexors

0.85

Hip Abductors

1.27

Knee Extensors

1.13

Interrater/Intrarater Reliability

Children with Spina Bifida (Mahoney et al., 2009)

  • Excellent interrater reliability for hip abductors: ICC = 0.75
  • Adequate interrater reliability for knee extensors: ICC = 0.40
  • Poor interrater reliability for hip flexors: ICC = 0.37

Bibliography

Cibulka, M. T., Weissenborn, D., Donham, M., Rammacher, H., Cuppy, P., & Ross, S. A. (2013). A new manual muscle test for assessing the entire trapezius muscle. Physiotherapy Theory & Practice, 29(3), 242–248. https://doi.org/10.3109/09593985.2012.718856

Pfister, P. B., de Bruin, E. D., Sterkele, I., Maurer, B., de Bie, R. A., & Knols, R. H. (2018). Manual muscle testing and hand-held dynamometry in people with inflammatory myopathy: An intra- and interrater reliability and validity study. PLOS ONE. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29596450

Fan, E., Ciesla, N. D., et al. (2010). "Inter-rater reliability of manual muscle strength testing in ICU survivors and simulated patients." Intensive Care Medicine 36(6): 1038-1043. Find it on PubMed

Herbison, G. J., Isaac, Z., et al. (1996). "Strength post-spinal cord injury: myometer vs manual muscle test." Spinal Cord 34(9): 543-548. Find it on PubMed

Mahoney, K., Hunt, K., Daley, D., Sims, S., & Adams, R. (2009). Inter-tester reliability and precision of manual muscle testing and hand-held dynamometry in lower limb muscles of children with spina bifida. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 29(1),44-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01942630802574858

Noreau, L. and Vachon, J. (1998). "Comparison of three methods to assess muscular strength in individuals with spinal cord injury." Spinal Cord 36(10): 716-723. Find it on PubMed

Rider, L.G., Koziol, D., Giannini, E.H., Jain, M., Smith, M., Whitney-Mahoney, K., Feldman, B., Wright, S., Lindsley, C., Pachman, L., Villalba, M., Lovell, D., Bowyer, S., Plotz, P., Miller, F., & Hicks, J. (2010). Validation of manual muscle testing and a subset of eight muscles for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. Arthritis Care Res, 62, 465-472. doi: 10.1002/acr.20035

Schwartz, S., Cohen, M. E., et al. (1992). "Relationship between two measures of upper extremity strength: manual muscle test compared to hand-held myometry." Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 73(11): 1063-1068. Find it on PubMed

Youdas, J. W., Madson, T. J., et al. (2010). "Usefulness of the Trendelenburg test for identification of patients with hip joint osteoarthritis." Physiother Theory Pract 26(3): 184-194. Find it on PubMed

Save now, read later.