Reliability, Validity, and Injury Predictive Value of the Functional Movement Screen

Nicholas A. Bonazza, Dallas Smuin, Cayce Onks, Matthew Silvis, Aman Dhawan

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is utilized by professional and collegiate sports teams and the military for the prevention of musculoskeletal injuries. Hypothesis: The FMS demonstrates good interrater and intrarater reliability and validity and has predictive value for musculoskeletal injuries. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using a computerized search of the electronic databases MEDLINE and ScienceDirect in adherence with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Extracted relevant data from each included study were recorded on a standardized form. The Cochran Q statistic was utilized to evaluate study heterogeneity. Pooled quantitative synthesis was performed to measure the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for interrater and intrarater reliability, along with 95% CIs, and odds ratios with 95% CIs for the injury predictive value for a score of ≤14. Results: Eleven studies for reliability, 5 studies for validity, and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were identified that met inclusion and exclusion criteria; of these, 6 studies for reliability and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were pooled for quantitative synthesis. The ICC for intrarater reliability was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.69-0.92) and for interrater reliability was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70-0.92). The odds of sustaining an injury were 2.74 times with an FMS score of ≤14 (95% CI, 1.70-4.43). Studies for validity demonstrated flaws in both internal and external validity of the FMS. Conclusion: The FMS has excellent interrater and intrarater reliability. Participants with composite scores of ≤14 had a significantly higher likelihood of an injury compared with those with higher scores, demonstrating the injury predictive value of the test. Significant concerns remain regarding the validity of the FMS.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)725-732
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Sports Medicine
Volume45
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2017

Fingerprint

Reproducibility of Results
Wounds and Injuries
Meta-Analysis
Predictive Value of Tests
MEDLINE
Sports
Odds Ratio
Databases
Guidelines

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

@article{51f9db1e0415454782bd606bcbd7918e,
title = "Reliability, Validity, and Injury Predictive Value of the Functional Movement Screen",
abstract = "Background: The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is utilized by professional and collegiate sports teams and the military for the prevention of musculoskeletal injuries. Hypothesis: The FMS demonstrates good interrater and intrarater reliability and validity and has predictive value for musculoskeletal injuries. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using a computerized search of the electronic databases MEDLINE and ScienceDirect in adherence with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Extracted relevant data from each included study were recorded on a standardized form. The Cochran Q statistic was utilized to evaluate study heterogeneity. Pooled quantitative synthesis was performed to measure the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for interrater and intrarater reliability, along with 95{\%} CIs, and odds ratios with 95{\%} CIs for the injury predictive value for a score of ≤14. Results: Eleven studies for reliability, 5 studies for validity, and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were identified that met inclusion and exclusion criteria; of these, 6 studies for reliability and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were pooled for quantitative synthesis. The ICC for intrarater reliability was 0.81 (95{\%} CI, 0.69-0.92) and for interrater reliability was 0.81 (95{\%} CI, 0.70-0.92). The odds of sustaining an injury were 2.74 times with an FMS score of ≤14 (95{\%} CI, 1.70-4.43). Studies for validity demonstrated flaws in both internal and external validity of the FMS. Conclusion: The FMS has excellent interrater and intrarater reliability. Participants with composite scores of ≤14 had a significantly higher likelihood of an injury compared with those with higher scores, demonstrating the injury predictive value of the test. Significant concerns remain regarding the validity of the FMS.",
author = "Bonazza, {Nicholas A.} and Dallas Smuin and Cayce Onks and Matthew Silvis and Aman Dhawan",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0363546516641937",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "725--732",
journal = "American Journal of Sports Medicine",
issn = "0363-5465",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "3",

}

Reliability, Validity, and Injury Predictive Value of the Functional Movement Screen. / Bonazza, Nicholas A.; Smuin, Dallas; Onks, Cayce; Silvis, Matthew; Dhawan, Aman.

In: American Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 45, No. 3, 01.03.2017, p. 725-732.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reliability, Validity, and Injury Predictive Value of the Functional Movement Screen

AU - Bonazza, Nicholas A.

AU - Smuin, Dallas

AU - Onks, Cayce

AU - Silvis, Matthew

AU - Dhawan, Aman

PY - 2017/3/1

Y1 - 2017/3/1

N2 - Background: The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is utilized by professional and collegiate sports teams and the military for the prevention of musculoskeletal injuries. Hypothesis: The FMS demonstrates good interrater and intrarater reliability and validity and has predictive value for musculoskeletal injuries. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using a computerized search of the electronic databases MEDLINE and ScienceDirect in adherence with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Extracted relevant data from each included study were recorded on a standardized form. The Cochran Q statistic was utilized to evaluate study heterogeneity. Pooled quantitative synthesis was performed to measure the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for interrater and intrarater reliability, along with 95% CIs, and odds ratios with 95% CIs for the injury predictive value for a score of ≤14. Results: Eleven studies for reliability, 5 studies for validity, and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were identified that met inclusion and exclusion criteria; of these, 6 studies for reliability and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were pooled for quantitative synthesis. The ICC for intrarater reliability was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.69-0.92) and for interrater reliability was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70-0.92). The odds of sustaining an injury were 2.74 times with an FMS score of ≤14 (95% CI, 1.70-4.43). Studies for validity demonstrated flaws in both internal and external validity of the FMS. Conclusion: The FMS has excellent interrater and intrarater reliability. Participants with composite scores of ≤14 had a significantly higher likelihood of an injury compared with those with higher scores, demonstrating the injury predictive value of the test. Significant concerns remain regarding the validity of the FMS.

AB - Background: The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is utilized by professional and collegiate sports teams and the military for the prevention of musculoskeletal injuries. Hypothesis: The FMS demonstrates good interrater and intrarater reliability and validity and has predictive value for musculoskeletal injuries. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using a computerized search of the electronic databases MEDLINE and ScienceDirect in adherence with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Extracted relevant data from each included study were recorded on a standardized form. The Cochran Q statistic was utilized to evaluate study heterogeneity. Pooled quantitative synthesis was performed to measure the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for interrater and intrarater reliability, along with 95% CIs, and odds ratios with 95% CIs for the injury predictive value for a score of ≤14. Results: Eleven studies for reliability, 5 studies for validity, and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were identified that met inclusion and exclusion criteria; of these, 6 studies for reliability and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were pooled for quantitative synthesis. The ICC for intrarater reliability was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.69-0.92) and for interrater reliability was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70-0.92). The odds of sustaining an injury were 2.74 times with an FMS score of ≤14 (95% CI, 1.70-4.43). Studies for validity demonstrated flaws in both internal and external validity of the FMS. Conclusion: The FMS has excellent interrater and intrarater reliability. Participants with composite scores of ≤14 had a significantly higher likelihood of an injury compared with those with higher scores, demonstrating the injury predictive value of the test. Significant concerns remain regarding the validity of the FMS.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85015194895&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85015194895&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0363546516641937

DO - 10.1177/0363546516641937

M3 - Review article

C2 - 27159297

AN - SCOPUS:85015194895

VL - 45

SP - 725

EP - 732

JO - American Journal of Sports Medicine

JF - American Journal of Sports Medicine

SN - 0363-5465

IS - 3

ER -