Evidence Hub

Clinical Utility of the Moving Valgus Stress Test and Milking Maneuver for Medial Ulnar Collateral Ligament Injuries of the Elbow

Sciascia AD, Bowman EN, Camp C, Chalmers P, Smith MV, Wolf BR, Griffith T, Erickson B et al.

The American journal of sports medicine, 2026

84 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several special tests for detecting medial ulnar collateral ligament (MUCL) injuries of the elbow have been described, but data on the clinical utility of these tests are limited.

PURPOSE: To determine the clinical utility of selected elbow special tests to detect MUCL injuries in an athletic population.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS: A total of 84 consecutive patients with sports-related elbow pain underwent a standardized clinical examination. Overall, 6 special tests (moving valgus stress test, static valgus stress test, modified valgus stress test, milking maneuver, pronation flexion resistance test, and temple/cheek press test) were performed. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive/negative predictive value, and positive/negative likelihood ratio (LR+ and LR-, respectively) were calculated for individual tests and combinations of tests to detect MUCL injuries. Higher values for the LR+ and lower values for the LR- represent stronger clinical utility.

RESULTS: For detecting MUCL injuries, the moving valgus stress test resulted in the highest sensitivity (98%) and accuracy (93%) with the lowest LR- (2%). The milking maneuver had the highest LR+ (5.1) with the second highest sensitivity (77%) and accuracy (79%). The pronation flexion resistance test and the temple/cheek press test had the lowest LR+ (1.5 and 1.8, respectively) and highest LR- (94% and 95%, respectively) in addition to the lowest sensitivity (16% and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 84 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free