Department of Athletic Training, University of Charleston, Charleston, West Virginia, USA.
J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Apr;27(4):966-72. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318260b723.
The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is currently used for injury risk prediction, although researchers have not studied its relationships to injury risk factors. The purpose of this study was to compare FMS scores at rest to changes in static balance after exercise. Second, we examined FMS scores pre and post exercise. Twenty-five participants performed center of pressure (COP) measures and FMS testing. An acclimatization session for the FMS occurred on day 1, whereas day 2 involved COP measures for static balance and FMS testing before and after a 36-minute exercise protocol. Center of pressure standard deviations in the frontal (COPML-SD) and sagittal (COPAP-SD) planes, center of pressure velocity (COP-Velocity), center of pressure area (COP-Area), and FMS scores were recorded. No significant correlations occurred between preexercise FMS scores and change in COP measures. Preexercise hurdle step scores related to preexercise COPML-SD (p = -0.46), COPAP-SD (p = -0.43), and COP-Area (p = -0.50). Preexercise in-line lunge scores related to postexercise COPAP-SD (p = -0.44) and COP-Velocity (p = -0.39), whereas preexercise active straight leg raise (ASLR) scores related to postexercise COPML-SD (p = -0.46). Functional Movement Screen scores were not related to changes in static balance after exercise and may therefore not be useful to predict who will experience greater static balance deficits after exercise. Additionally, FMS scores did not differ before and after exercise. Clinicians aiming to identify injury risk from a general static balance standpoint may find the hurdle step, in-line lunge, and ASLR useful. Clinicians aiming to identify injury risk from a change in static balance standpoint may need to explore other screening tools.
功能性运动筛查（FMS）目前用于预测受伤风险，尽管研究人员尚未研究其与受伤风险因素的关系。本研究的目的是比较休息时的 FMS 评分与运动后静态平衡的变化。其次，我们检查了运动前后的 FMS 评分。25 名参与者进行了压力中心（COP）测量和 FMS 测试。FMS 的适应阶段发生在第 1 天，而第 2 天则涉及在 36 分钟运动方案前后进行 COP 测量和 FMS 测试。记录了额状面（COPML-SD）和矢状面（COPAP-SD）的压力中心标准差、压力中心速度（COP-Velocity）、压力中心面积（COP-Area）和 FMS 评分。运动前 FMS 评分与 COP 测量值的变化之间没有显著相关性。前测跨栏步评分与前测 COPML-SD（p=-0.46）、COPAP-SD（p=-0.43）和 COP-Area（p=-0.50）相关。前测直线弓步评分与后测 COPAP-SD（p=-0.44）和 COP-Velocity（p=-0.39）相关，而前测主动直腿抬高（ASLR）评分与后测 COPML-SD（p=-0.46）相关。运动后 FMS 评分与静态平衡变化无关，因此可能无法用于预测谁在运动后会出现更大的静态平衡缺陷。此外，运动前后 FMS 评分没有差异。从一般静态平衡角度出发，旨在识别受伤风险的临床医生可能会发现跨栏步、直线弓步和 ASLR 有用。从静态平衡变化的角度出发，旨在识别受伤风险的临床医生可能需要探索其他筛查工具。
