Literature DB >> 24662154

Functional movement screen scores in a group of running athletes.

Janice K Loudon1, Amy J Parkerson-Mitchell, Laurie D Hildebrand, Connie Teague.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the mean values of the functional movement screen (FMS) in a group of long-distance runners. The secondary aims were to investigate whether the FMS performance differed between sexes and between young and older runners. Forty-three runners, 16 women (mean age = 33.5 years, height = 165.2 cm, weight = 56.3 kg, and body mass index [BMI] = 20.6) and 27 men (mean age = 39.3 years, height = 177.6 cm, weight = 75.8 kg, and BMI = 24.2) performed the FMS. All the runners were injury-free and ran >30 km·wk. Independent t-tests were performed on the composite scores to examine the differences between men and women and also between young (<40 years) and older runners (>40 years). Contingency tables (2 × 2) were developed for each of the 7 screening tests to further look at the differences in groups for each single test. The χ values were calculated to determine significant differences. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. There was no significant difference in the composite score between women and men. There were significant differences between the sexes in the push-up and straight leg test scores, with the women scoring better on each test. A significant difference was found in the composite scores between younger and older runners (p < 0.000). Additional score differences were found for the squat, hurdle step, and in-line lunge tests with the younger runners scoring better. This study provided mean values for the FMS in a cohort of long-distance runners. These values can be used as a reference for comparing FMST scores in other runners who are screened with this tool.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24662154     DOI: 10.1097/JSC.0000000000000233

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  10 in total

1.  Use of clinical movement screening tests to predict injury in sport.

Authors:  Nicole J Chimera; Meghan Warren
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2016-04-18

2.  THERE ARE NO BIOMECHANICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RUNNERS CLASSIFIED BY THE FUNCTIONAL MOVEMENT SCREEN.

Authors:  Rodrigo Ribeiro de Oliveira; Shalimá Figueirêdo Chaves; Yuri Lopes Lima; Márcio Almeida Bezerra; Gabriel Peixoto Leão Almeida; Pedro Olavo de Paula Lima
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2017-08

Review 3.  Setting standards for medically-based running analysis.

Authors:  Heather K Vincent; Daniel C Herman; Leslie Lear-Barnes; Robert Barnes; Cong Chen; Scott Greenberg; Kevin R Vincent
Journal:  Curr Sports Med Rep       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.733

4.  FUNCTIONAL MOVEMENT SCREEN™ in YOUTH SPORT PARTICIPANTS: EVALUATING the PROFICIENCY BARRIER for INJURY.

Authors:  Craig E Pfeifer; Ryan S Sacko; Andrew Ortaglia; Eva V Monsma; Paul F Beattie; Justin Goins; David F Stodden
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2019-06

5.  Functional Movement Screening and Paddle-Sport Performance.

Authors:  Andrew Hatchett; Charles Allen; Jake St Hilaire; Alex LaRochelle
Journal:  Sports (Basel)       Date:  2017-06-13

Review 6.  Utility of FMS to understand injury incidence in sports: current perspectives.

Authors:  Meghan Warren; Monica R Lininger; Nicole J Chimera; Craig A Smith
Journal:  Open Access J Sports Med       Date:  2018-09-07

7.  Predictive Validity of a Functional Movement Screen in Professional Basketball Players.

Authors:  Donald L Hoover; Clyde B Killian; Rachel A Tinius; David M Bellar; Steven G Wilkinson; Francis T Esslinger; Lawrence W Judge
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2020-12-21       Impact factor: 2.430

8.  Functional Movement Quality of Firefighter Recruits: Longitudinal Changes from the Academy to Active-Duty Status.

Authors:  David J Cornell; Stacy L Gnacinski; Kyle T Ebersole
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 3.390

9.  Functional movement screen and Y-Balance test scores across levels of American football players.

Authors:  Peter Lisman; Mary Nadelen; Emily Hildebrand; Kyle Leppert; Sarah de la Motte
Journal:  Biol Sport       Date:  2018-08-27       Impact factor: 2.806

10.  Functional movement screen comparison between the preparative period and competitive period in high school baseball players.

Authors:  Chia-Lun Lee; Mei-Chich Hsu; Wen-Dien Chang; Szu-Chieh Wang; Chao-Yen Chen; Pei-Hsi Chou; Nai-Jen Chang
Journal:  J Exerc Sci Fit       Date:  2018-07-04       Impact factor: 3.103

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.