The relationship between the Functional Movement Screen(TM) and countermovement jump height.

摘要

Introduction: Pre-participation measures of functional movement and functional performance are commonly used to gauge injury risk and performance baselines before engaging in activity. Functional movement can be evaluated using the Functional Movement Screen(TM) (FMS(TM)). Performance on the FMS(TM) has been shown to be related to injury risk by previous researchers. Functional performance can be evaluated with countermovement jump (CMJ) testing; performance on a CMJ demonstrates transferable power to athletic tasks. Performance literature has shown that there are movement factors that influence CMJ height. However, to date a significant relationship between performance on functional movement and functional performance tests has not been found. Therefore, the primary purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the FMS(TM) total score, scored on a 100-point and 21-point scale, and CMJ height. The secondary purpose of the study was to perform an exploratory analysis examining the relationship of the 21-point live scoring method as well as a 21-point video scoring method of the FMS(TM). Methods: This study examined the relationship between functional movement and functional performance of 36 participants. Functional movement was evaluated with the FMS(TM). The FMS(TM) was scored on three scoring scales: 21-point live, 21-point video and 100-point. Functional performance was quantified with CMJ height. Performance height of the CMJ was examined through the use of a Myotest Sport unit. Bivariate Pearson correlations were used to examine the relationships among all tested variables. Results: All FMS(TM) scoring methods were significantly related to CMJ height. Each of the FMS(TM) scoring scales were also significantly related to one another. Conclusions: Functional movement appears to be related to functional performance regardless of the scale used to score the FMS(TM). Additionally, the strong relationship shown between the scoring scales suggests that the scales evaluate movement patterns similarly. However, more research is needed to better understand the relationship between these two variables. Further research is also needed to determine the validity of the FMS(TM) scoring scales and identify if the component tests are scored differently on each scale.