Fig. 5. Frequency <strong>of</strong> muscle grades by age group. aga<strong>in</strong>st gravity, the trunk flexor muscle test may be more difficult for the younger age groups. We excluded from this study children who did not have full neck flexion strength aga<strong>in</strong>st gravity. Therefore, the reported values <strong>of</strong> trunk flexor muscle grades may be higher than those <strong>of</strong> many children, especially the younger age groups. The assignment <strong>of</strong> a criterion-based muscle grade did not account for the quality <strong>of</strong> movement. Although the younger children <strong>of</strong>ten completed the requirements for a specific muscle grade, they did not exhibit the same quality <strong>of</strong> movement as older children who received the same muscle grade. We observed that, <strong>in</strong> general, younger children took more time to complete the tests, attempted to use more trunk rotation <strong>in</strong>stead <strong>of</strong> pure trunk flexion, and lacked the smoothness <strong>of</strong> movement that was present <strong>in</strong> the older children. Further study needs to be conducted on a larger, randomly selected group <strong>of</strong> both sexes to establish normative trunk flexor muscle grades <strong>in</strong> children. Such research should <strong>in</strong>clude test<strong>in</strong>g a wider age range <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g older children and adolescents. <strong>Muscle</strong> strength test<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> children under 3 years <strong>of</strong> age may not be feasible because <strong>of</strong> their <strong>in</strong>ability to follow <strong>in</strong>structions. Measure <strong>of</strong> isometric trunk flexor muscle strength, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g duration <strong>of</strong> contraction, may also be useful <strong>in</strong> assess<strong>in</strong>g trunk flexor muscle strength <strong>in</strong> children. In addition, simultaneous EMG record<strong>in</strong>gs from the abdom<strong>in</strong>al and hip flexor muscles would be useful <strong>in</strong> determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the relative Fig. 6. Regression l<strong>in</strong>e for muscle grade vs subject age. RESEARCH Volume 64 / Number 8, August 1984 1207 Downloaded from http://ptjournal.apta.org/ by guest on March 25, 2013
contribution <strong>of</strong> these muscles dur<strong>in</strong>g trunk flexion muscle test<strong>in</strong>g procedures. <strong>Cl<strong>in</strong>ical</strong> Implications The results <strong>of</strong> this study have cl<strong>in</strong>ical significance to physical therapists assess<strong>in</strong>g and treat<strong>in</strong>g pediatric patients. This method <strong>of</strong> measur<strong>in</strong>g trunk flexor muscle strength can be easily adapted to cl<strong>in</strong>ical practice. The suggested values <strong>of</strong> trunk flexor muscle strength serve as guidel<strong>in</strong>es <strong>of</strong> assess<strong>in</strong>g performance <strong>in</strong> these specific age groups. In addition, the suggested <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> muscle grade for each year <strong>of</strong> age may be used to measure <strong>in</strong>cremental strength ga<strong>in</strong>s <strong>in</strong> a develop<strong>in</strong>g child. CONCLUSION We developed a cl<strong>in</strong>ical method for assess<strong>in</strong>g trunk flexor muscle strength us<strong>in</strong>g pr<strong>in</strong>ciples <strong>of</strong> EMG and biomechanics. REFERENCES 1. Kendall HO, Kendall FP, Wadsworth GE: <strong>Muscle</strong>s: Test<strong>in</strong>g & Function, ed 2. Baltimore, MD, Williams & Wilk<strong>in</strong>s, 1971, pp 214-233 2. Daniels L, Worth<strong>in</strong>gham C: <strong>Muscle</strong> Test<strong>in</strong>g: Techniques <strong>of</strong> Manual Exam<strong>in</strong>ation, ed 4. Philadelphia, PA, WB Saunders Co, 1980, pp 22-24 3. Harvey VP, Scott GD: An <strong>in</strong>vestigation <strong>of</strong> the curl-down test as a measure <strong>of</strong> abdom<strong>in</strong>al strength. Res Q 38:22-27,1967 4. Nacheson A, L<strong>in</strong>dh M: Measurement <strong>of</strong> abdom<strong>in</strong>al and back strength with and without low back pa<strong>in</strong>. Scand J Rehabil Med 1:60-65, 1969 5. Hasue M, Fijiwara M, Kikuchi S: A new method <strong>of</strong> quantitative measurement <strong>of</strong> abdom<strong>in</strong>al and back muscle strength. Sp<strong>in</strong>e 5:143-148,1980 6. McNeil T, Warwick D, Anderson G, et al: <strong>Trunk</strong> strengths <strong>in</strong> attempted flexion, extension, and lateral bend<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> healthy subjects and patients with low-back disorders. Sp<strong>in</strong>e 5:529-538,1980 7. Thorstensson A, Nilsson J: <strong>Trunk</strong> muscle strength dur<strong>in</strong>g constant velocity movements. Scand J Rehabil Med 14:61-68,1982 8. Davies GJ, Gould JA: <strong>Trunk</strong> test<strong>in</strong>g us<strong>in</strong>g a prototype Cybex® II isok<strong>in</strong>etic dynamometer stabilization system. The Journal <strong>of</strong> Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy 3:164-170, 1982 9. Fl<strong>in</strong>t MM: Abdom<strong>in</strong>al muscle <strong>in</strong>volvement dur<strong>in</strong>g the performance <strong>of</strong> various forms <strong>of</strong> sit-up exercise. Am J Phys Med 44:224-234, 1965 10. Fl<strong>in</strong>t MM: Electromyographic comparison <strong>of</strong> the function <strong>of</strong> the iliacus and rectus abdom<strong>in</strong>us muscle. Phys Ther 45:248-253,1965 11. Halpern AA, Bleck EE: Sit-up exercises: An electromyographic study. Cl<strong>in</strong> Orthop 145:172-178,1979 12. Gut<strong>in</strong> B, Lipetz S: An electromyographic <strong>in</strong>vestigation <strong>of</strong> rectus abdom<strong>in</strong>us <strong>in</strong> abdom<strong>in</strong>al exercises. Res Q 42:256-263,1971 13. Girard<strong>in</strong> Y: EMG action potentials <strong>of</strong> rectus abdom<strong>in</strong>us muscle dur<strong>in</strong>g two types <strong>of</strong> abdom<strong>in</strong>al exercises. In Cerquigl<strong>in</strong>i S, et al (eds): Biomechanics III: Medic<strong>in</strong>e and Sport. Baltimore, MD, University Park Press, 1973, vol 8, pp 301-309 14. Godfrey KE, K<strong>in</strong>dig LE, W<strong>in</strong>dell EJ: Electromyographic study <strong>of</strong> duration <strong>of</strong> muscle activity <strong>in</strong> sit-up variations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 58:132-135, 1977 15. Walters CE, Partridge MJ: Electromyographic study <strong>of</strong> the differential action <strong>of</strong> the abdom<strong>in</strong>al muscles dur<strong>in</strong>g exercise. Am J Phys Med 36:259- 268,1967 16. Youth Fitness Manual. Wash<strong>in</strong>gton, DC, American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 1962, pp 5-26 17. Youth Fitness Manual: Revised Edition. Wash<strong>in</strong>gton, DC, American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 1976, pp 28-60 18. Glover EG: Physical fitness test items for boys and girls <strong>in</strong> the first, second, and third grades (1962). Cited <strong>in</strong> Barrow HM, McGee R: A Practical Approach to Measurement <strong>in</strong> Physical Education, ed 3. Philadelphia, PA, Lea & Febiger, 1979, pp 211-217 <strong>Trunk</strong> flexor muscle strength <strong>in</strong> girls between the ages <strong>of</strong> 3 and 7 years <strong>in</strong>creased proportionately with age by approximately one-third <strong>of</strong> a muscle grade a year. The mean muscle grade for the 3- to 7-year-old age groups was 3.3, 3.7, 4.1, 4.4, and 4.8, respectively. Factors suggested as hav<strong>in</strong>g a possible <strong>in</strong>fluence on the development <strong>of</strong> trunk flexor muscle strength <strong>in</strong>cluded muscle cross-sectional area, muscle-fiber diameter, muscle-cell number, maturation <strong>of</strong> the CNS, and changes <strong>in</strong> body proportions with age. The reported values <strong>of</strong> trunk flexor muscle grades serve as guidel<strong>in</strong>es for assessment <strong>of</strong> trunk flexor muscle strength <strong>in</strong> pediatric patients 3 to 7 years <strong>of</strong> age. Acknowledgments. We thank Dr. Rupert Miller, PhD, for his statistical consultation and Valerie Coon, MA, for her valuable consultative services. We also give thanks to Eric Swenson for his assistance with equipment design and photography and to Jack Baldauf for his assistance with figure preparation. 19. Fl<strong>in</strong>t MM, Diehl B: Influence <strong>of</strong> abdom<strong>in</strong>al strength, back extensor strength, and trunk strength balance upon atero-posterior alignment <strong>of</strong> elementary school girls. Res Q 32:490-498,1961 20. Frankel VH, Nord<strong>in</strong> M (eds): Basic Biomechanics <strong>of</strong> the Skeletal System. Philadelphia, PA, Lea & Febiger, 1980, p 282 21. Cochran WG, Snedecor GW: Statistical Methods, ed 7. Ames, Iowa, Iowa State University Press, 1980, pp 204-206 22. Gabbard CP, Patterson PE: Relationship and comparison <strong>of</strong> selected anthropometric measures <strong>of</strong> muscular endurance and strength <strong>in</strong> children aged 3-5 years. Ann Hum Biol 7:583-586,1980 23. Asmussen E: Growth <strong>in</strong> muscular strength and power. In Rarick GL (ed): Physical Activity: Human Growth & Development. New York, NY, Academic Press Inc, 1973, pp 60-79 24. Asmussen E, Heeboll-Nielson K: Physical performance and growth <strong>in</strong> children: Influence <strong>of</strong> sex, age, and <strong>in</strong>telligence. J Appl Physiol 8:371-380, 1956 25. Teeple J, Massey B: Force-time parameters and anthropometry <strong>of</strong> boys ages 6 to 12 years. Res Q 47:464-471,1976 26. Carron A, Bailey D: <strong>Strength</strong> Development <strong>in</strong> Boys from 10 Through 16 Years. Chicago, IL, Society for Research <strong>in</strong> Child Development, 1974, vol 39, no. 4, pp 1-37 27. Molnar G, Alexander J: Objective, quantitative muscle test<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> children: A pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 54:224-228,1973 28. Molnar G, Alexander J: Muscular strength <strong>in</strong> children: Prelim<strong>in</strong>ary report on objective standards. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 54:424-427,1973 29. Molnar G, Alexander J: Development <strong>of</strong> quantitative standards for muscle strength <strong>in</strong> children. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 55:490-493,1974 30. Molnar G, Alexander J, Gutfield N: Reliability <strong>of</strong> quantitative strength measurements <strong>in</strong> children. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 60:218-221, 1979 31. McComas AJ, Sica R, Petito F: <strong>Muscle</strong> strength <strong>in</strong> boys <strong>of</strong> different ages. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 36:171-173,1973 32. Asmussen E, Heeboll-Nielson K, Molbech SV: Methods for Evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>Muscle</strong> <strong>Strength</strong>. Hellerup, Denmark, Communications, Test<strong>in</strong>g and Observations Institute, Danish National Association for Infantile Paralysis, 1959, vol 5, pp 3-13 33. McComas AJ: Neuromuscular Functions & Disorders, Boston, MA, Butterworth Publishers, 1977, pp 92-100 34. Cheek DB: <strong>Muscle</strong> cell growth <strong>in</strong> normal children. In Cheek DB (ed): Human Growth. Philadelphia, PA, Lea & Febiger, 1968, pp 337-351 35. Cratty BS: Perceptual & Motor Development <strong>in</strong> Infants & Young Children, ed 2. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall Inc, 1979, pp 280-282 1208 PHYSICAL THERAPY Downloaded from http://ptjournal.apta.org/ by guest on March 25, 2013