Study of the measurement and predictive validity of the Functional Movement Screen

Fraser Philp* (Corresponding Author), Dimitra Blana, Edward K Chadwick, Caroline Stewart, Claire Stapleton, Kim Major, Anand D Pandyan

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the reported measurement capabilities and predictive validity of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) for injury.

Methods: This was a prospective observational longitudinal study of 24 male footballers from a single team in England, alongside analysis of an existing database over one season (September 2015-May 2016). A preseason FMS was carried out with scores recorded by an experienced assessor and derived, retrospectively, from the three-dimensional movement data that were simultaneously captured. The assessor scores were compared with the photogrammetric system to determine measurement validity, and predictive validity was quantified by assessing sensitivity and specificity (cut-off score of 14).

Results: The real-time assessor score matched the photogrammetric score awarded for one of the participants, was higher than the photogrammetric system for 22 participants and was lower than the photogrammetric system in 1 participant. There was no discernible relationship between FMS scores and the competencies required to be met as per the rules articulated for the allocation of a score. A higher number of total injuries were associated with higher FMS scores, whether determined through real-time assessment or codification of kinematic variables. Additionally, neither method of score determination was able to prospectively identify players at risk of serious injury.

Conclusion: The FMS does not demonstrate the properties essential to be considered as a measurement scale and has neither measurement nor predictive validity. A possible reason for these observations could be the complexity in the instructions associated with the scale. Further work on eliminating redundancies and improving the measurement properties is recommended.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere000357
JournalBMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine
Volume4
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 May 2018

Fingerprint

Wounds and Injuries
Biomechanical Phenomena
England
Observational Studies
Longitudinal Studies
Databases
Sensitivity and Specificity

Cite this

Study of the measurement and predictive validity of the Functional Movement Screen. / Philp, Fraser (Corresponding Author); Blana, Dimitra; Chadwick, Edward K; Stewart, Caroline; Stapleton, Claire; Major, Kim; Pandyan, Anand D.

In: BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, Vol. 4, No. 1, e000357, 07.05.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Philp, Fraser ; Blana, Dimitra ; Chadwick, Edward K ; Stewart, Caroline ; Stapleton, Claire ; Major, Kim ; Pandyan, Anand D. / Study of the measurement and predictive validity of the Functional Movement Screen. In: BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine. 2018 ; Vol. 4, No. 1.
@article{5a3e6d591a01401e9e364981a29ae2cc,
title = "Study of the measurement and predictive validity of the Functional Movement Screen",
abstract = "Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the reported measurement capabilities and predictive validity of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) for injury.Methods: This was a prospective observational longitudinal study of 24 male footballers from a single team in England, alongside analysis of an existing database over one season (September 2015-May 2016). A preseason FMS was carried out with scores recorded by an experienced assessor and derived, retrospectively, from the three-dimensional movement data that were simultaneously captured. The assessor scores were compared with the photogrammetric system to determine measurement validity, and predictive validity was quantified by assessing sensitivity and specificity (cut-off score of 14).Results: The real-time assessor score matched the photogrammetric score awarded for one of the participants, was higher than the photogrammetric system for 22 participants and was lower than the photogrammetric system in 1 participant. There was no discernible relationship between FMS scores and the competencies required to be met as per the rules articulated for the allocation of a score. A higher number of total injuries were associated with higher FMS scores, whether determined through real-time assessment or codification of kinematic variables. Additionally, neither method of score determination was able to prospectively identify players at risk of serious injury.Conclusion: The FMS does not demonstrate the properties essential to be considered as a measurement scale and has neither measurement nor predictive validity. A possible reason for these observations could be the complexity in the instructions associated with the scale. Further work on eliminating redundancies and improving the measurement properties is recommended.",
author = "Fraser Philp and Dimitra Blana and Chadwick, {Edward K} and Caroline Stewart and Claire Stapleton and Kim Major and Pandyan, {Anand D}",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000357",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
journal = "BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine",
issn = "2055-7647",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Study of the measurement and predictive validity of the Functional Movement Screen

AU - Philp, Fraser

AU - Blana, Dimitra

AU - Chadwick, Edward K

AU - Stewart, Caroline

AU - Stapleton, Claire

AU - Major, Kim

AU - Pandyan, Anand D

PY - 2018/5/7

Y1 - 2018/5/7

N2 - Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the reported measurement capabilities and predictive validity of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) for injury.Methods: This was a prospective observational longitudinal study of 24 male footballers from a single team in England, alongside analysis of an existing database over one season (September 2015-May 2016). A preseason FMS was carried out with scores recorded by an experienced assessor and derived, retrospectively, from the three-dimensional movement data that were simultaneously captured. The assessor scores were compared with the photogrammetric system to determine measurement validity, and predictive validity was quantified by assessing sensitivity and specificity (cut-off score of 14).Results: The real-time assessor score matched the photogrammetric score awarded for one of the participants, was higher than the photogrammetric system for 22 participants and was lower than the photogrammetric system in 1 participant. There was no discernible relationship between FMS scores and the competencies required to be met as per the rules articulated for the allocation of a score. A higher number of total injuries were associated with higher FMS scores, whether determined through real-time assessment or codification of kinematic variables. Additionally, neither method of score determination was able to prospectively identify players at risk of serious injury.Conclusion: The FMS does not demonstrate the properties essential to be considered as a measurement scale and has neither measurement nor predictive validity. A possible reason for these observations could be the complexity in the instructions associated with the scale. Further work on eliminating redundancies and improving the measurement properties is recommended.

AB - Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the reported measurement capabilities and predictive validity of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) for injury.Methods: This was a prospective observational longitudinal study of 24 male footballers from a single team in England, alongside analysis of an existing database over one season (September 2015-May 2016). A preseason FMS was carried out with scores recorded by an experienced assessor and derived, retrospectively, from the three-dimensional movement data that were simultaneously captured. The assessor scores were compared with the photogrammetric system to determine measurement validity, and predictive validity was quantified by assessing sensitivity and specificity (cut-off score of 14).Results: The real-time assessor score matched the photogrammetric score awarded for one of the participants, was higher than the photogrammetric system for 22 participants and was lower than the photogrammetric system in 1 participant. There was no discernible relationship between FMS scores and the competencies required to be met as per the rules articulated for the allocation of a score. A higher number of total injuries were associated with higher FMS scores, whether determined through real-time assessment or codification of kinematic variables. Additionally, neither method of score determination was able to prospectively identify players at risk of serious injury.Conclusion: The FMS does not demonstrate the properties essential to be considered as a measurement scale and has neither measurement nor predictive validity. A possible reason for these observations could be the complexity in the instructions associated with the scale. Further work on eliminating redundancies and improving the measurement properties is recommended.

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000357corr1

U2 - 10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000357

DO - 10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000357

M3 - Article

VL - 4

JO - BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine

JF - BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine

SN - 2055-7647

IS - 1

M1 - e000357

ER -