The aim of this review was to evaluate and synthesize the scientific literature of the functional movement screen (FMS)-driven research for scientists and strength and conditioning specialists. An additional purpose was to optimize the methodological quality of prospective studies. Relevant research was identified through using a manual and electronically database search. Thirty-four articles met the inclusion criteria and were read, abstracted, and coded for this review. The publications were classified into different stages of Bishops Applied Research Model for the Sport Sciences (ARMSS). Thirteen descriptive studies explored the main tasks in test development like factor structure, objectivity, and reliability. They can be classified to the second stage of Bishops Model (ARMSS stage 2). Twelve studies covered ability of FMS to predict sporting performance and injury risk (ARMSS stages 3 and 4). Seven studies investigated the effectiveness of the FMS in designing programs (ARMSS stages 6 and 8). In addition, 2 assessed norming data. On the descriptive level, results suggest that the FMS is a reliable screen, if the rater is educated and has solid experience (>100 trials). Factor analysis describes the FMS as a unitary construct, which is an argument against the FMS total score. Studies clearly illustrate its limited ability to predict athletic performance. On the contrary, to predict injury risk in team sports, the FMS total score is supported by moderate scientific evidence. The majority of the FMS based intervention programs showed an improvement on general motor quality. However, a randomized trial does not confirm that results. Hence, to implement the findings on field, a critical strength and conditioning specialist is crucial.
Knowledge about sport-specific load profiles as well as about the variety of treatment options is crucial for successful treatment of these injuries.
Sports injuries and athletic performance are complex areas, which are characterized by manifold interdependencies. The landing error scoring system (LESS) is a valid screening tool to examine bilateral jump-landing mechanics. Whereas, the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) items are thought to operationalize flexibility and motor behaviour during low intense bodyweight patterns. The aim of the study was to explore possible interdependency of the diagnostic information of these screening tools. 53 athletes (age 23.3±2.1 yrs.) were tested in a sport scientific lab. In detail, 31 professional soccer players (3 Division) and 22 collegiate athletes were studied. Linear, partial correlational and cluster analysis were performed to examine possible trends. Generally, the sportsmen achieved a LESS score of 6.6±2 and a jumping height of 37±7.8cm. Partial correlational analysis indicates that trunk control (r=0.4; p<0.01) is moderately related to landing mechanics, which in turn was negatively related on LESS height (r=-0.67, p<0.01). In addition, clustering showed by trend, that a higher active straight leg raise (ASLR) score is related to better landing mechanics (ASLR score 1: LESS 6.9±1.8; n=15 vs. ASLR score 3: LESS 5.6±2.1; n=10). On the task-specific level, jump-landing mechanics were directly related to jumping performance in this cohort with poor mechanics. On unspecific analysis level, kinetic chain length (ASLR) and trunk control has been identified as potential moderator variables for landing mechanics, indicating that these parameter can limit landing mechanics and ought to be optimized within the individual´s context. A potential cognitive strategy shift from internal (FMS) to external focus (LESS) as well as different muscle recruitment patterns are potential explanations for the non-significant linear relationship between the FMS and LESS data.
Context: The validity and reliability of manual goniometry is highly dependent on the examiner’s expertise. Technological advances can overcome these problems to some extent. Inertial goniometry, for instance, could bridge the gap between 2D and manual goniometry, but its validity remains to be studied. Participants: 40 healthy individuals (mean ± SD: 31 men, age = 23.9 ± 4.1 years, 184 ± 6 cm, 80.7 ± 10.0 kg; 9 women, age = 23.6 ± 3.6 years, 170 ± 4 cm, 60.6 ± 5.1 kg). Measurements: 2D and inertial goniometry by mobee med™ were used to measure active and passive single straight-leg raise mobility performance. Intracorrelation coefficients (ICCs) and typical error of the estimate (TEE) inform the reliability and quality of the measurement by the rater. Results: The relationship of the inertial goniometry for active and passive mobility of the single straight-leg raise was practically perfect (r = .95–.98). Based on the Bland-Altman plots, the means of the difference between the 2D and inertial based goniometry were small (2–3°). Conclusion: Due to its high concurrent validity, ease of use, and efficiency with regard to time and personnel requirements, this inertial goniometer device is an effective and efficient approach to measuring range of motion. However, additional validity and reliability studies should investigate joints with more degrees of freedom.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.