Factor Structure and Internal Validity of the Functional Movement Screen in Adults. Issue 2 (February 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Koehle, Michael S.; Saffer, Boaz Y.; Sinnen, Nadine M.; MacInnis, Martin J.
• Is Part Of: Journal of strength and conditioning research. Volume 30:Issue 2(2016)
• Publication Date: 2016-02
• Subjects: injury prevention -- psychometrics -- physical fitness -- biomechanics; Physical education and training -- Periodicals; Weight training -- Physiological aspects -- Periodicals; Physical fitness -- Periodicals; 613.7
• DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001092
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1064-8011

Abstract

Abstract : Abstract: Koehle, MS, Saffer, BY, Sinnen, NM, and MacInnis, MJ. Factor structure and internal validity of the Functional Movement Screen in adults. J Strength Cond Res 30(2): 540–546, 2016—The factor structure and internal consistency of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) have not been examined in a general healthcare population. Replicating the factor structure of the FMS is important because it illustrates the interdependence between each of the subtests, enabling the strength and conditioning professional to better interpret and act on an individual's FMS score. Anthropometric data and FMS scores were collected from 1, 113 clients of a multidisciplinary healthcare clinic in Vancouver, BC The mean ( SD ) ages were 53.4 (11.1) for men ( n = 656) and 49.3 (12.3) for women ( n = 457). The mean FMS Summary Score was 13.7 (2.9) and was significantly negatively correlated with both age ( r = −0.25; p < 0.001) and body mass index ( r = −0.37; p < 0.001). The internal consistency of the FMS scale, which was assessed with both ordinal and Cronbach's alpha, was 0.73 and 0.64, respectively. Polychoric correlations between individual movements ranged from 0.03 to 0.59. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) revealed that the FMS showed 2 main factors, a basic movement factor (shoulder mobility and active straight leg raise) and a complex movement factor (squat, hurdle step, inline lunge, and the trunk stability push-up). Rotary stability loaded onto both factors in the CFA, and its exclusion from the model had little effect. The findings of this study broadly replicated the intended factor structure of the FMS, as the individual movements aligned well with the intended factors.