Grading the Functional Movement Screen: A Comparison of Manual (Real-Time) and Objective Methods
David Whiteside1, Jessica M Deneweth, Melissa A Pohorence
11School of Kinesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and 2Athletic Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
|August 28, 2014
Summary
Manual grading of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) shows poor agreement with objective motion capture. Vague FMS criteria hinder accurate assessments, suggesting cautious use of FMS for training guidance.
Area of Science:
- Sports Medicine
- Biomechanics
- Movement Science
Background:
- Functional Movement Screen (FMS) research often focuses on reliability.
- Criterion validity of manual FMS grading remains under-examined.
- Objective measurement systems offer potential for improved FMS assessment.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare FMS scores from a certified tester with objective inertial measurement unit (IMU) data.
- To assess the criterion validity of manual FMS grading.
- To identify limitations in current FMS grading procedures.
Main Methods:
- Eleven Division I female collegiate athletes performed 6 FMS exercises.
- Manual FMS grading was performed by a certified tester.
- Objective kinematic thresholds were derived and applied to IMU data for grading.
Main Results:
- Poor levels of agreement were found between manual and IMU-based FMS grading across all 6 exercises.
- Vague grading criteria likely contribute to inconsistencies in manual FMS scoring.
- Current manual FMS grading may not be a sufficiently valid measurement tool.
Conclusions:
- Explicit grading guidelines are needed to enhance FMS uniformity and accuracy.
- Objective measurement systems could aid in more reliable FMS grading.
- The FMS should be used cautiously for directing strength and conditioning until grading is validated.
