Ability of the Functional Movement Screen™ to Predict Injuries and Performance in Collegiate Track and Field Athletes
Anderson, Kendra L.
This item will be available on: 2018-1-15
The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is a tool designed to identify limitations and compensatory movement patterns of individuals in order to help improve performance and decrease injuries. While research has demonstrated that the FMS can be assessed reliably across raters, evidence for the validity of the FMS to predict injury and performance is scarce. PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to: (a) examine the ability of the Functional Movement Screen and a bilateral weight distribution measure to predict injuries in collegiate track and field athletes over the course of a season, and (b) determine if FMS scores are related to performance using the standing vertical jump performance test. METHODS: Collegiate track and field athletes (N = 36) completed the FMS protocol, a bilateral weight distribution test as a comparison measure, and the vertical jump as a performance test. The FMS consists of seven functional movements scored on a 0-3 scale rating the quality of movement patterns. A bilateral weight distribution test was used as a comparison measure to examine injury prediction. The bilateral weight distribution test was conducted by having the athlete stand on two scales with one foot on each to record asymmetrical differences in body mass. Measurements were taken with the athlete’s feet at shoulder width distance apart and again with feet placed apart at 1/3 of his or her height. Results were categorized into positive and negative tests for the FMS based on a previously established cutoff score. A positive test was defined two ways: (a) a difference in body mass between scales of ≥ 3% and (b) a difference in body mass between scales of ≥ 5%. Interrater reliability was estimated by using a one-way analysis of variance to assess the consistency between two raters who concurrently scored 15 athletes. Injuries were monitored by the team’s head athletic trainer and reported weekly throughout the season. Sensitivity and specificity values were calculated to examine the accuracy of the different screening methods to identify participants who were injuries or not injured. An accuracy statistic was calculated to show the probability of correct diagnosis (sustaining an injury and having a positive test or not sustaining an injury and having a negative test). Pearson product-moment correlations were calculated to examine the association between FMS and standing vertical jump performance. RESULTS: Interrater reliability for the total FMS score between the lead and secondary rater was excellent (ICC = .98, 95% CI = .94-.99). The mean ± SD for total FMS scores among all participants was 14.9 ± 2.7 (male: 15.4 ± 2.9; female: 14.8 ± 2.7). Of the 35 athletes, 25 athletes (71%) experienced at least one injury during the 9-week outdoor season. Due to a small sample size for males (n = 11), analysis focused on the female sample (n = 25). For the FMS among females, sensitivity was .65 and specificity was .75. Accuracy results showed that the FMS (accuracy = 68%) correctly diagnosed injury status better than the bilateral weight distribution measure with feet at shoulder width (accuracy = 32% at ≥ 5% difference in body mass and accuracy = 36% at ≥ 3% difference in body mass) and at 1/3 of the participant’s height (accuracy = 48% at ≥ 5% difference in body mass and accuracy = 36% at ≥ 3% difference in body mass. Both tests were poor at predicting injury in the sample. No significant relationship was found between total FMS score and vertical jump performance for females (r = .11, p = .61). CONCLUSION: The FMS can be used reliably with track and field athletes; however, the ability of the FMS to accurately predict injury status was not supported in the current study. Although the FMS was slightly more accurate than the bilateral weight distribution measures at predicting injury status, the accuracy of the FMS to predict injury status in female in track and field athletes was modest. Total FMS scores were not related to vertical jump performance in female track and field athletes.
Anderson, Kendra L.. (January 0001). Ability of the Functional Movement Screen™ to Predict Injuries and Performance in Collegiate Track and Field Athletes (Master's Thesis, East Carolina University). Retrieved from the Scholarship. (http://hdl.handle.net/10342/5099.)
Anderson, Kendra L.. Ability of the Functional Movement Screen™ to Predict Injuries and Performance in Collegiate Track and Field Athletes. Master's Thesis. East Carolina University, January 0001. The Scholarship. http://hdl.handle.net/10342/5099. March 25, 2017.
Anderson, Kendra L., “Ability of the Functional Movement Screen™ to Predict Injuries and Performance in Collegiate Track and Field Athletes” (Master's Thesis., East Carolina University, January 0001).
Anderson, Kendra L.. Ability of the Functional Movement Screen™ to Predict Injuries and Performance in Collegiate Track and Field Athletes [Master's Thesis]. Greenville, NC: East Carolina University; January 0001.
East Carolina University