Published normative data for grip, pinch, and hand extension force — compiled as a clinical reference for occupational and physical therapists using the Splayometer.
Normative reference values support interpretation of individual patient results and inform goal setting, but should always be contextualized within each client's occupational profile and personal history.
Within the Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process (4th ed.; AOTA, 2020), hand strength norms are most relevant to the evaluation of client factors — specifically neuromusculoskeletal and movement-related body functions, including muscle power functions. These body functions underlie performance skills (motor skills) and ultimately support occupational performance across areas including ADLs, work, and leisure.
The OTPF-4 emphasizes that assessment of client factors must always be considered in relation to the client's occupational profile and context. A grip strength value that falls below population norms may or may not be functionally limiting for a given individual — and an above-norm value does not guarantee full occupational participation. Normative data is one input among many in a holistic evaluation (AOTA, 2020).
Published normative databases exist primarily for:
Splayometer-Specific Norms: Device-specific normative data for the Splayometer is in active development. Until published reference ranges are available, clinicians should emphasize within-patient serial comparison — tracking change over time for the individual — rather than comparison to population norms. See the positioning note in the Standard Use Procedures for guidance on replicating test conditions across sessions.
The most widely used normative dataset for grip strength in adults, measured with the JAMAR hand dynamometer at handle position II.
| Age Group | Male — Dominant (kg) | Male — Non-Dominant (kg) | Female — Dominant (kg) | Female — Non-Dominant (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20–24 | 56.6 | 53.4 | 31.6 | 28.5 |
| 25–29 | 57.4 | 54.0 | 33.3 | 30.0 |
| 30–34 | 56.6 | 52.8 | 33.9 | 30.6 |
| 35–39 | 56.0 | 52.3 | 31.3 | 28.2 |
| 40–44 | 54.0 | 50.9 | 30.5 | 28.0 |
| 45–49 | 51.2 | 48.4 | 27.4 | 25.4 |
| 50–54 | 49.5 | 45.9 | 26.5 | 24.4 |
| 55–59 | 44.0 | 41.0 | 23.2 | 22.1 |
| 60–64 | 43.3 | 40.0 | 20.9 | 18.9 |
| 65–69 | 39.1 | 36.0 | 19.0 | 17.2 |
| 70–74 | 35.4 | 33.0 | 16.6 | 15.1 |
| 75+ | 29.5 | 28.1 | 14.4 | 13.2 |
These remain the most widely cited grip strength norms in North American occupational and physical therapy practice and are recommended by the American Society of Hand Therapists (ASHT) as a standard reference. Values were collected from a community-based sample of 310 males and 328 females with no known upper extremity pathology.
Normative data for the three standard pinch configurations, measured with a standard pinch gauge.
| Age Group | Tip Pinch — Male (kg) | Tip Pinch — Female (kg) | Lateral Pinch — Male (kg) | Lateral Pinch — Female (kg) | 3-Jaw Chuck — Male (kg) | 3-Jaw Chuck — Female (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20–24 | 8.2 | 5.2 | 9.4 | 5.8 | 9.5 | 5.7 |
| 25–34 | 8.5 | 5.5 | 9.5 | 6.1 | 9.6 | 6.1 |
| 35–44 | 8.3 | 5.2 | 9.3 | 5.9 | 9.4 | 5.9 |
| 45–54 | 8.0 | 4.6 | 9.0 | 5.5 | 9.1 | 5.5 |
| 55–64 | 6.9 | 4.1 | 8.1 | 4.9 | 8.1 | 4.9 |
| 65–74 | 6.3 | 3.5 | 7.0 | 4.4 | 7.5 | 4.2 |
Published normative data for isolated finger extension and abduction force is more limited than for grip and pinch. Below is a summary of available evidence and its clinical relevance.
Finger extension and abduction strength has received substantial attention in biomechanics research but has not yet been as systematically normed for clinical populations as grip and pinch. Key findings from the published literature include:
Values from healthy adult populations; based on biomechanics laboratory studies using force transducers in standardized hand positions.
Values are approximate ranges from Li et al. (1998) and related literature. Healthy adults, mixed sex. Not intended as definitive clinical norms — consult primary sources.
Published data for isolated finger abduction force; primarily from biomechanics and rheumatology research contexts.
Approximate ranges; values vary considerably by method. Brorsson et al. (2009); Nordenskiöld & Grimby (1993). Splayometer-specific norms in development.
Until device-specific norms are published, the most clinically meaningful use of Splayometer data is within-patient serial tracking. Establish a baseline measurement at the first session, replicate test conditions at each subsequent session, and document change over time as the primary outcome indicator. Refer to the Standard Use Procedures for positioning protocols that support reliable serial comparison.
Normative data should be applied with appropriate clinical judgment, contextual awareness, and sensitivity to individual variation.
In the absence of population norms specific to a measurement configuration, the contralateral (unaffected) hand provides a practical within-person reference standard. A commonly cited heuristic is that the dominant hand should be 5–10% stronger than the non-dominant hand; values outside this range may warrant further investigation. However, this relationship varies considerably across individuals and should not be applied rigidly.
A clinically meaningful change is generally defined as a difference that exceeds the measurement error of the instrument. For grip dynamometry, the minimal detectable change (MDC) is approximately 3–5 kg (Mathiowetz et al., 1984). Splayometer-specific MDC values will be established as device-specific validity data are published. In the interim, changes greater than 10–15% from baseline across consistent test conditions are likely to reflect true change rather than measurement variability.
Typical grip strength advantage of the dominant hand over the non-dominant hand in healthy adults (Mathiowetz et al., 1985).
Approximate range of individual finger extension force as a percentage of total grip force in healthy adults (Li et al., 1998).
Grip and pinch strength peak in the late 20s to late 30s and decline progressively thereafter, with notable decline after age 55 (Mathiowetz et al., 1985).
Sources for the normative data and clinical context presented on this page.
Follow our step-by-step standard use procedures for reliable, reproducible Splayometer measurements across all test configurations.