No abstract

The Functional Movement Screen™ (FMS) has demonstrated some efficacy in the prediction of injuries and is thus used by many practitioners to make recommendations for exercise. However, questions remain regarding its utility as a means to evaluate the effectiveness of training. Sixty firefighters volunteered to participate, and their FMS scores were examined before and after 12 weeks of training. Individuals were graded on how they chose to perform rather than how they could perform. The participants were assigned to 1 of 3 groups: intervention 1, intervention 2, or control. The 2 intervention groups received three 1.5-hour training sessions each week and differed in the emphasis that was placed on movement quality. Sagittal and frontal plane videos were used to grade the FMS with 3 methods: the standard 0-3 scale, a 100-point scale that weighted specific compensations (research standard), and a modified 100-point scale whereby grades were assigned based on the total number of compensations present. There were no significant differences in the total FMS scores for any group posttraining. However, the scores of 85% of the firefighters who did not receive training did change. The 100-point scale methods resulted in more FMS score changes posttraining, but the between-group interactions were identical to those found with the standard scoring method. The control group's scores were not consistent pretraining and posttraining; thus, the influence of each intervention could not be evaluated. Currently, the FMS might provide a momentary impression of general movement quality, although further efforts would likely assist in the development of better ways to implement the test, interpret the results, and generate reliable scores.

Firefighter injuries are not just a fireground problem. Injury causation may be better understood by linking the injury location and type with motion patterns rather than job duties. This information could assist in developing general prevention strategies for the fire service.

Biomechanical quantities acquired during the drop vertical jump (DVJ) are used in the assessment of athletic performance and injury risk. The objective was to examine the impact of different verbal instructions on spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic variables commonly included in such assessments. Ten men and 10 women from local varsity and club volleyball, basketball, figure skating, and track and field teams volunteered to participate. The athletes performed DVJs after given instructions to minimize ground contact time (CT), maximize jump height (HT), and synchronously extend the lower extremity joints (EX). Between the CT, HT, and EX conditions, body segment and joint angles were compared together with characteristics of vertical ground reaction force (GRF), whole-body power output, stiffness, and center-of-mass displacement time histories. Verbal instructions were found to influence nearly all of the spatiotemporal, body segment and joint kinematic, and kinetic variables that were statistically analyzed. Particularly noteworthy was the finding that athletic performance indices (e.g., jump height, power output, vertical stiffness, and reactive strength index) and lower extremity injury risk markers (e.g., peak vertical GRF and frontal plane knee angle) were significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) between the CT, HT, and EX conditions. The findings of this study suggest that verbal instructions should be controlled and/or clearly documented when using the DVJ to assess athletic performance potential and injury risk. Moreover, practitioners who devise performance enhancement and injury prevention strategies based on DVJ assessments are advised to consider that "coaching" or "cueing" during the task execution could impact conclusions drawn.

Frost, DM, Beach, TAC, Callaghan, JP, and McGill, SM. FMS scores change with performers' knowledge of the grading criteria-Are general whole-body movement screens capturing "dysfunction"? J Strength Cond Res 29(11): 3037-3044, 2015-Deficits in joint mobility and stability could certainly impact individuals' Functional Movement Screen (FMS) scores; however, it is also plausible that the movement patterns observed are influenced by the performers' knowledge of the grading criteria. Twenty-one firefighters volunteered to participate, and their FMS scores were graded before and immediately after receiving knowledge of the movement patterns required to achieve a perfect score on the FMS. Standardized verbal instructions were used to administer both screens, and the participants were not provided with any coaching or feedback. Time-synchronized sagittal and frontal plane videos were used to grade the FMS. The firefighters significantly (p , 0.001) improved their FMS scores from 14.1 (1.8) to 16.7 (1.9) when provided with knowledge pertaining to the specific grading criteria. Significant improvements (p , 0.05) were also noted in the deep squat (1.4 [0.7]-2.0 [0.6]), hurdle step (2.1 [0.4]-2.4 [0.5]), in-line lunge (2.1 [0.4]-2.7 [0.5]), and shoulder mobility (1.8 [0.8]-2.4 [0.7]) tests. Because a knowledge of a task's grading criteria can alter a general whole-body movement screen score, FMS or otherwise, observed changes may not solely reflect "dysfunction." The instant that individuals are provided with coaching and feedback regarding their performance on a particular task, the task may lose its utility to evaluate the transfer of training or predict musculoskeletal injury risk.

No abstract

The most common and costly injuries occurred while attending to fire station-related responsibilities and during physical training.

No abstract