Strengths and limitations of functional screening tests. Take Home Points Movement screens probably aren’t best viewed as screens since they lack sensitivity. Movement screens are good at exposing how someone chooses to move during specific tests. Unfortunately, we can’t generalize these movement patterns to other contexts. So in effect, passing a movement screen only tells us that the flaw we are hoping to expose doesn’t occur during the test, but can still occur during everyday movements. Movement screens aren’t surrogates for other areas of physical function. Screens aren’t well correlated with spine “stability” measures, trunk endurance/strength, physical performance, or basic measures of joint kinesiology. All of these metrics may hold some value in injury prevention. Perhaps movement screens should just be viewed as movement assessments in their own right. If they lack transferability to other tasks and aren’t surrogates for other functions, then we should view them as distinct. There can still be value in seeing how someone moves during these tests (they are now tests and not screens). You can make up your own movement assessments: the ideas behind the screens (i.e. exposing a “flaw”) in movement can be useful. If you believe that flaws/movement dysfunctions are relevant to injury risk or current injuries, then every test, movement, exercise, or performance can be an assessment. Learning from the professionals that teach the FMS can be helpful in you creating your own assessments. Go buy the book Movement by Gray Cook. It’s very well done. Read more at: medbridgeeducation/h/blog-greg-lehman-screening-movement-dyfunction-sub?utm_source=MedBridge+List&utm_campaign=40c3f0795c-5-17-Blog-Lehman-FMS-sub&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1851b16ffd-40c3f0795c-303717261
Posted on: Tue, 20 May 2014 14:37:30 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015