Functional Movement Screening and Injury Rates in High School and Collegiate Runners: A Retrospective Analysis of 3 Prospective Observational Studies. Issue 4 (July 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bring, Benjamin V.; Chan, Miriam; Devine, Robin C.; Collins, Christy L.; Diehl, Jason; Burkam, Benjamin
• Is Part Of: Clinical journal of sport medicine. Volume 28:Issue 4(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-07
• Subjects: Functional Movement Screening -- distance runners -- injury prediction -- injury prevention -- high school runners -- collegiate runners; Sports medicine -- Periodicals; 617.1027
• DOI: 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000459
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1050-642X

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: Determine if the Functional Movement Screening (FMS) can be used to predict injury in high school and collegiate cross-country and track runners. Design: Prospective Observational, Cohort Study, Level of Evidence, 2. Setting: High schools and colleges in the Central Ohio area. Patients: Inclusion: (1) cross-country or track runners at participating schools; (2) full participation without restrictions; and (3) signed informed assent or consent. Exclusion: (1) Any injury or lower extremity surgery within 30 days; (2) planned limited participation in the upcoming season; or (3) other participation restrictions. Interventions: Functional Movement Screening was completed before the start of each season. Injuries were tracked during the regular season. No interventions were made based on FMS score. Main Outcome Measures: Functional Movement Screening scores, including overall, lower extremity, and specific exercises were compared between runners who did and did not sustain an injury using 2 sample t tests. A cutoff FMS score of ⩽14 (most common in previous studies), and ⩽15 (determined by a receiver operating characteristic curve), were compared using χ 2 tests. Results: One hundred eighty-three runners were enrolled in the study. Overall, 32 (17.5%) runners sustained an injury. Functional Movement Screening score was not accurate in predicting injury for ⩽14 (sensitivity: 65.6%; specificity: 39.7%; and area under the curve = 0.501) or ⩽15 (sensitivity: 84.4% and specificity: 23.8%). There was no difference in risk of injury for runners with a FMS score of ⩽14 (15.5%) and >14 (18.8%) ( P = 0.572) or with a FMS score of ⩽15 (17.5%) and >15 (17.4%) ( P = 0.988). Conclusions: Functional Movement Screening composite score may not be useful for injury prediction in populations of high school and collegiate runners.