Detailed guides to painful problems, treatments & more

Relationship between functional movement screen and athletic performance

PainSci » bibliography » Parchmann et al 2011
Tags: fibromyalgia, chronic pain, pain problems

One article on PainSci cites Parchmann 2011: The Functional Movement Screen (FMS)

PainSci commentary on Parchmann 2011: ?This page is one of thousands in the bibliography. It is not a general article: it is focused on a single scientific paper, and it may provide only just enough context for the summary to make sense. Links to other papers and more general information are provided wherever possible.

This experiment compared direct measures of athletic performance like sprinting speed and vertical jump with less direct measures like maximal squat strength (the most they could lift in one squat) and even less direct measure like scores on the functional movement screen (FMS). In theory, FMS testing can predict athletic performance. In practice, in this test, it did not “relate to any aspect of athletic performance.” But squat strength did!

~ Paul Ingraham

original abstract Abstracts here may not perfectly match originals, for a variety of technical and practical reasons. Some abstacts are truncated for my purposes here, if they are particularly long-winded and unhelpful. I occasionally add clarifying notes. And I make some minor corrections.

Relationship between functional movement screen and athletic performance. J Strength Cond Res 25(12): 3378-3384, 2011-Tests such as the functional movement screen (FMS) and maximal strength (repetition maximum strength [1RM]) have been theorized to assist in predicting athletic performance capabilities. Some data exist concerning 1RM and athletic performance, but very limited data exist concerning the potential ability of FMS to assess athletic performance. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if FMS scores or 1RM is related to athletic performance, specifically in Division I golfers in terms of sprint times, vertical jump (VJ) height, agility T-test times, and club head velocity. Twenty-five National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I golfers (15 men, age = 20.0 ± 1.2 years, height = 176.8 ± 5.6 cm, body mass = 76.5 ± 13.4 kg, squat 1RM = 97.1 ± 21.0 kg) (10 women, age = 20.5 ± 0.8 years, height = 167.0 ± 5.6 cm, body mass = 70.7 ± 21.5 kg, squat 1RM = 50.3 ± 16.6) performed an FMS, 1RM testing, and field tests common in assessing athletic performance. Athletic performance tests included 10- and 20-m sprint time, VJ height, agility T-test time, and club head velocity. Strength testing included a 1RM back squat. Data for 1RM testing were normalized to body mass for comparisons. Correlations were determined between FMS, 1RMs, and athletic performance tests using Pearson product correlation coefficients (p ≤ 0.05). No significant correlations existed between FMS and 10-m sprint time (r = -0.136), 20-m sprint time (r = -0.107), VJ height (r = 0.249), agility T-test time (r = -0.146), and club head velocity (r = -0.064). The 1RM in the squat was significantly correlated to 10-m sprint time (r = -0.812), 20-m sprint time (r = -0.872), VJ height (r = 0.869), agility T-test time (r = -0.758), and club head velocity (r = 0.805). The lack of relationship suggests that FMS is not an adequate field test and does not relate to any aspect of athletic performance. Based on the data from this investigation, 1RM squat strength appears to be a good indicator of athletic performance.

This page is part of the PainScience BIBLIOGRAPHY, which contains plain language summaries of thousands of scientific papers & others sources. It’s like a highly specialized blog. A few highlights: