Inter tester reliability study of the functional movement screen fms tm
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 30

Inter-tester Reliability Study of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS TM ) PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 71 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Inter-tester Reliability Study of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS TM ). Mariam Pashtoonwar, Anang Chokshi, Lindsay Blaauw, Cesar Fajardo Kaiser Permanente Sports and Extremities Fellowship. Contents. Description of FMS TM Evidence for FMS TM Description of Testing Procedure

Download Presentation

Inter-tester Reliability Study of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS TM )

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Inter tester reliability study of the functional movement screen fms tm

Inter-tester Reliability Study of the Functional Movement Screen (FMSTM)

Mariam Pashtoonwar, Anang Chokshi, Lindsay Blaauw, Cesar Fajardo

Kaiser Permanente Sports and Extremities Fellowship


Contents

Contents

  • Description of FMSTM

  • Evidence for FMSTM

  • Description of Testing Procedure

  • Inter-tester Reliability Results


Functional movement screen fms tm

Functional Movement Screen (FMSTM)

  • Tests and grades 7 fundamental movements

  • Football pre-season movement screen

  • Compares asymmetry of body side to side

  • Useful for both sports and non- sports patient populations


Functional movement screen fms tm1

Functional Movement Screen (FMSTM)

7 Fundamental Movement Tests

  • Deep Squat

  • Hurdle Step

  • In-line Lunge

  • Shoulder Mobility

  • Active Straight Leg Raise (SLR)

  • Trunk Stability Push Up

  • Rotary Stability


1 deep squat

1.) Deep Squat

Instructions: Stand with feet shoulder width apart. Hold the stick over your head with your shoulders in a “V” position, elbows straight. Squat down as far as you can and try to keep your heels on the floor with your head and chest facing forward.

Grading:

III: Subject able to squat down with heels on ground & chest/head facing forward. Arms directly over ahead.

II: Proper form as stated above with 2x6 under heels

I: If they cannot complete the movement properly


2 hurdle step

2.) Hurdle Step

*Can be performed up to 3 times bilaterally

The hurdle should be aligned with the height of the subject’s tibial tuberosity.

Instructions: Place your feet together with your toes aligned touching the base of the 2x6. Place the stick behind your head across your shoulders and below your neck. Slowly step over the hurdle with one leg and touch your heel to the floor, making sure your standing leg stays straight. Then return your moving leg to the starting position. Repeat with the other leg.

Grading:

III: Subject able to complete bilaterally with no twisting or

compensatory movement

II: Subject compensated in some way by twisting, leaning or

moving the spine

I: Subject has loss of balance or if contact is made with the

hurdle.


3 in line lunge

3.) In-Line Lunge

*Can be performed up to 3 times bilaterally

Measure subject’s tibia length (from floor to the tibial tuberosity (in centimeters)). A 2x6 board is placed on the floor. Using the tibia length a mark is made on the board from the end of the subjects toes.

Instructions: Place your left heel on the end of the board. Hold the stick behind your back with your left hand behind your neck and your right hand at your tailbone. Keep the stick in contact with your head, mid-back and tailbone to keep your back straight. Step forward with your right foot placing your heel at the indicated mark. Bend both knees until your back knee touches the board. Return to starting position. Repeat with opposite leg and opposite hand holds

Grading:

III: Subject able to complete bilaterally with no twisting or

compensatory movement

II: Subject compensated in some way by twisting, leaning or

moving the spine

I: Subject has loss of balance or unable to complete


4 shoulder mobility

4.) Shoulder Mobility

The subject’s hand will first be measured (in centimeters) from the distal wrist crease to the tip of the third digit.

Instructions: Place both hands in a fist. Reach with one arm overhead as far as you can. With the other fist reach behind your back towards the other fist.

Instructions for the clearing exam: Place one hand on the opposite shoulder and point your elbow upward. Repeat with the other hand. Ask “Any pain?”

Grading:

III: Subject’s fists are within one hand length

II: Subject’s fists are within 1 ½ hand lengths

I: Subject’s fists fall outside this length.

Zero: Pain with clearing test (done at end of the test)


5 active straight leg raise

5.) Active Straight Leg Raise

*Can be performed up to 3 times bilaterally

Place a 2x6 board on the floor. (Place a dowel

perpendicular at the midpoint of the ASIS and the midpoint

of the patella at the thigh.)

Instructions: Lie on your back with your head flat and your arms straight with your palms up and the back of your knees on the board. Lift your leg with your ankle flexed and your knee straight and keep yourother knee in touching the board. Repeat with the other leg.

Grading:

III: If subject’s malleolus of the raised leg is located past the dowel

If malleolus does not pass the dowel then the dowel is aligned along the medial malleolus of the test leg, perpendicular to the floor.

II: If this point is between the thigh midpoint and the patella

I: If this point is below the knee


6 trunk stability push up

6.) Trunk Stability Push Up

Instructions: Begin in a push-up position with your feet together

For a male: Place your hands down on the floor, shoulder width apart with your thumbs at forehead height

For a female: Place your hands down on the floor, shoulder width apart with your thumbs in line with your chin.

With your knees straight and on your toes, perform one push-up while keeping your back straight.

Clearing Test Instructions: Begin face-down on the floor propped on your elbows. Press up onto your hands extending your back.

Grading:

III: Complete one (1) pushup without lumbar spine lag

If the push up cannot be performed the hands are lowered with the thumbs aligning with the chin for males and the clavicles for females

II: Complete one (1) pushup with lumbar spine lag at modified

hand position

I: Subject is unable to complete the test

Zero: Pain with clearing test (done at end of the test)


7 rotary stability

7.) Rotary Stability

*Can be performed up to 3 times bilaterally

Instructions: Begin on your hands and knees with your hands in line with your shoulders and your knees in line with your hips. (PT places a 2x6 board between their hands and knees so they are in contact with the board). Reach forward with your right arm and at the same time straighten out your right leg behind you only about 6 inches off the floor. Keep your arm and leg aligned with the board. Then bring the leg and arm together until the elbow and knee touch. Repeat with the other arm and leg. 

If the subject cannot perform the movement above:

Tell them to “Do the same movement using opposite arm and leg. For example, right elbow to the left knee while keeping your back straight.

Grading:

III: Hand and knee remain in line with the 2x6 as well as the torso

and they complete the movement with same side arm and leg.

II: Hand and knee remain in line with the 2x6 as well as the torso

and they complete the movement with the opposite arm and leg.

I: If loss of balance occurs or they cannot perform either

movements bilaterally.


Inter tester reliability study of the functional movement screen fms tm

EBP: Can Serious Injury In Professional Football Be Predicted By A Preseason Functional Movement Screen? (NAJSPT August 2007)

Kyle Kiesel, PT, PhD, ATC, CSCS

Philip J. Plisky, PT, DSc, OCS, ATC

Michael L. Voight, PT, DHSc, OCS, SCS


Purpose of study

Purpose of Study

  • To examine the relationship between the relationship between professional football players’ score on the FMSTM and the likelihood of a player suffering a serious injury over the course of one competitive season.


Materials and methods

Materials and Methods

  • Retrospective Study

  • N=45 professional football players

  • All players tested on FMSTM

  • Surveillance time for study: one full football season (4.5 months)


Results of data

Results of Data

  • Cut off score that maximized specificity and sensitivity of receiver-operated characteristic (ROC) was 14

  • Specificity = .91

  • Sensitivity = .54

  • Odds Ratio = 11.67

  • Negative likelihood ratio = .51


Conclusion

Conclusion

  • If a player scored < 14:

    • 51% chance of suffering an injury

    • Eleven fold increased chance of injury when compared to players who had a higher score


Purpose of current study

Purpose of Current Study

  • There is some evidence that shows the FMS is useful to predict serious injury in football players

  • Question: What is the Inter-tester Reliability of the Functional Movement Screen?


Testing procedure for study

Testing Procedure for Study

  • Subjects: High School Football Players

  • All subjects are Males aged 14-16

  • All players tested on FMSTM

  • Data gathered on: Age, Weight, Height, Position, BMI, Previous Injury


Testing procedure for study1

Testing Procedure for Study

  • One Physical Therapist administered test

  • Instruction was given only by this one therapist

  • Three other physical therapists scored each subject independently (Scorers A-C)

  • Scores were not shared between therapists during or post testing


Data collection

Data Collection

  • Scoring for the FMSTM based on procedure delineated by Cook, Burton and Hoogenboom1

  • Each score was recorded for 7 individual tests of FMSTM


Data analysis plan

Data Analysis Plan

  • Total Number of Football Players Tested

    N = 18

  • Statistical Analysis Used:

    • Kappa Coefficient


Kappa coefficient

Kappa Coefficient

  • Statistical measure of inter-rater agreement

  • Takes into account the agreement occurring by chance

  • Possible values range from +1 (perfect agreement) to 0 (no agreement above that expected by chance) to -1 (complete disagreement)


Kappa s coefficient cont d

Kappa’s Coefficient Cont’d…

  • Kappa = (observed agreement - chance agreement)/(1-chance agreement)


Kappa strength

Kappa Strength

(from Landis and Koch, 1997)


Our kappa results

Our Kappa Results

Average Kappa per Test:

1.) Deep Squat = 63%= Substantial

2.) Hurdle Step = 34%= Fair

3.) In-Line Lunge = 56%= Moderate

4.) Shoulder Mobility = 85%= Almost Perfect

5.) Active Straight Leg Raise = 77%= Substantial

6.) Trunk Stability Push Up = 81%= Almost Perfect

7.) Rotary Stability = 53%= Moderate


Observed agreement 12 18 66 7

Observed agreement = 12/18 = 66.7%

A

B 7

8

3

5 10 3


Our results cont d

Our Results Cont’d…

  • Highest Inter-Rater Reliability for Shoulder Mobility Test, Trunk Stability Push Up, Active Straight Leg Raise and Deep Squat

  • Inter-Rater Reliability lowest for Hurdle Step


Discussion

Discussion

  • Higher Inter-Rater Reliability for shoulder mobility and ASLR possibly due to more objective measure, less variability

  • Lower Inter-Rater Reliability for Hurdle Step, In-Line Lunge and Rotary Stability secondary to more subjective interpretation

  • Variability in grading secondary to lack of experience with the tests (i.e. increased variability between Caesar’s scores vs. Mariam and Anang’s)


Conclusion1

Conclusion

  • Overall, FMS is a reliable test: average of all tests=moderate strength

  • Ways to minimize difference in testers’ scores:

    -all testers observe subject from same place (i.e. frontal plane, sagittal, etc)

    -testers should be equally trained


References

References

  • Cook G, Burton L, Hoogenboon B. Pre-participation screening: The use of fundamental movements as an assessment of function – Part 1. NAJSPT May 2006:1:62-71

  • Kiesel K, Plisky P J, Voight M L. Can Serious Injury In Professional Football Be Predicted By A Preseason Functional Movement Screen? NAJSPT August 2007 2:147-151


  • Login