Objective To test a Revised Goniometry RG method and compare it to Standard Goniometry SG used to measure burn scar contracted joint angles for determine disability severity and function in a burn population. Hypothesis Significant statistical differences in patient joint angle measurements will be found between SG techniques compared to RG techniques which incorporate CKM and CFU principles. Specific Aim 1 To compare the average reduction in joint range of motion measured with the standard GM measurements to a newly conceived set of revised GM measurements in a burn population across six 6 joints of interest in eleven 11 single directions. Specific Aim 2 To compare the average reduction in joint range of motion measured with the standard GM measurements to a newly conceived set of revised GM measurements in a burn population for each of the six 6 joints of interest in eleven 11 single directions. Specific Aim 3 To examine the association between the reduction in the joint range of motion and the extent of cutaneous surface area involvement. Note specific aims updated to align with core protocol. Concluding Remarks RG method resulted in significantly greater limitation in motion than SG 38.8 15.2 v. 32.1 13.4 p.0001 across all motions together and for 9 of 11 motions when evaluated individually. There was a significant positive weak correlation between amount of CFU scarred and ROM outcome with RG but not with SG R2.05, p.0008. This demonstratesthat RG is a more appropriate method for measuring scar contracture in burn survivors.