- Post-training changes in spine and knee motion control were similar across groups. - Substantial variation in spine and knee motion was seen amongst the control group. - The FMS did not capture kinematic changes that occurred in response to training.Low demand movement screens may not challenge control of relevant motions. - The FMS may not be an effective tool to assess the transfer of training. Objective: To examine whether objective measures of spine and frontal plane knee motion exhibited during Functional Movement Screen™ (FMS) task performance changed following a movement-guided fitness (MOV) and conventional fitness (FIT) exercise intervention. Design: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled experiment. Before and after 12 weeks of exercise, participants' kinematics were quantified while performing the FMS and a series of general wholebody movement tasks. Setting: Biomechanics laboratory. Participants: Fifty-two firefighters were assigned to MOV, FIT, or a control (CON) group. Outcome measures: Peak lumbar spine flexion/extension, lateral bend and axial twist, and frontal plane knee motion. Results: The post-training kinematic changes exhibited by trainees while performing the FMS tasks were similar in magnitude (effect size < 0.8) to those exhibited by CON. However, when performing the battery of general whole-body movement tasks, only MOV showed significant improvements in spine and frontal plane knee motion control (effect size > 0.5). Conclusions: Whether graded qualitatively, or quantitatively via kinematic analyses, the FMS may not be a viable tool to detect movement-based exercise adaptations. Amendments to the FMS tasks and/or scoring method are needed before it can be used for reasons beyond appraising the ability to move freely, symmetrically, and without pain.
© Copyright 2017 Physical Therapy in Sport. Elsevier. All rights reserved.