Menu ENN Search
Language: English Français

MUAC in children less than 6 months old

This question was posted the Management of small and nutritionally at risk infants under six months and their mothers (MAMI) forum area and has 3 replies.

» Post a reply

Ilaria Di Modugno

Normal user

15 Feb 2023, 08:18

Why is it not recommended to measure MUAC in children who are less than 6 months old?

André Briend

Frequent user

15 Feb 2023, 09:29

Dear Ilaria,

You could use MUAC in children less than 6 months to identify those who are at high risk, but you should use a different cut-off. You could also use weight for age. All this is explained in the document available at:

Dr Marko Kerac

Normal user

15 Feb 2023, 10:56

On the issue of anthro indicators for infants <6m, do also check this systematic review



There is increasing global focus on small and nutritionally at-risk infants aged <6 months (<6 m). Current WHO guidelines recommend weight-for-length z-score (WLZ) for enrolment to malnutrition treatment programmes but acknowledge a weak evidence-base. This review aims to inform future guidelines by examining which anthropometric criteria best identify infants <6 m at high risk of mortality/morbidity.


We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane Library and POPLINE for studies conducted in low- and middle-income countries and published between 1990 and October 2020. We included studies reporting anthropometric assessment of nutritional status in infants <6 m and assessed the association with subsequent morbidity or mortality.


A total of 19 studies were included in the final review, covering 20 countries, predominantly in sub-Saharan Africa. WLZ had poor reliability and poor prognostic ability to identify infants at risk of death. Mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) and weight-for-age z-score (WAZ) were better at identifying infants at risk of mortality/morbidity. MUAC-for-age z-score did not perform better than using a single MUAC cut-off. Suggested MUAC cut-offs for this age group varied by context, ranging from 10.5 to 11.5 cm. The assessment for reliability showed that length was difficult to measure, making WLZ the least reliable indicator overall.


Evidence from our review suggests that a change in current practice is necessary. To better identify small and nutritionally at-risk infants <6 m WAZ and/or MUAC rather than WLZ should be used. Future research should explore possible benefits for programme coverage, impact and cost-effectiveness. Research should also examine if context-specific MUAC thresholds are needed.

Lilly J

Normal user

15 Feb 2023, 21:48

There is still a growing evidence on MUAC to be used to identify nutrition vulnerablilty  in infants under 6 months.However,classification cut-off have not been established for children less than 6 months.

If you have any problem posting a response, please contact the moderator at

Back to top

» Post a reply