Novel way for FMS score calculation highlights field of sport- specific information among young competitive athletes

Abstract

Any complex movement encompasses information about a person's abilities and disabilities. FMS™ test includes such exercise tests that have shown to reflect risk for injury in the athletic population. There are few reports where FMS™ score reflects certain sports to be more prone to injury. The inconsistency of results may arise from the way subtest scores are combined. Instead of a summation we propose to apply more justified method of geometric mean of subtest scores to tally the final composite score. We used tests on 215 young competitive athletes, 133 young female (age 17.35 ± 1,65) and 82 males (age 17,78± 2.1) from 8 fields of sport (volleyball, basketball, handball, fencing, judo, biathlon, cycling, soccer). Original FMS 21 point (FMS21) were used and for every participant's arithmetic and geometric mean were calculated. The mean composite FMS™ score of young female athletes was 14.3±1.7 and for male's 13.8±1.6 out of possible 21 total point. The comparison of sport-specific geometric mean values among girls showed that basketball players had significantly lower results than athletes from biathlon and handball players. Contrarily among boys the handball players had lowest values, being significantly lower from in cyclists, fencers and soccer players. Cyclists had also higher geometric mean values than volleyball players and judo athletes. Detailed analysis of the structure of differences is needed to highlight the specific causes impacting FMS_GM for assessment for seriousness and for specific exercises to potentially compensate for the sport specific detrimental effect on the kinematic chain.

The Effect of Single High-Velocity, Low-Amplitude Spine Manipulation on Posture, Functional State of Torso, Thigh Muscles, and Vertical Jump Height

“…Most of the authors attribute the mechanical effect of the manipulation on the spine to the irritation of the neural component in the capsule sac, which in turn causes the reflection of the reflectors in the surrounding tissues. Manipulation promotes changes in the reflex of neuromuscular regulation, which in turn elicits body responses that can be assessed in the static or posture of the subject, but establishes the fact that this effect of corrective manipulation is transient (Pedak et al, 2019;Gouttebarge et al, 2017;Nagy, Müller, Birō, Eszter & Iuliana, 2017). The results of our study show that immediately after the manipulation, the deviations of the posture from the correct posture pattern were reduced by 25.45% ± 1.27% (p = .001).…”

“…The authors confirm that this manipulative effect does not always have a sufficiently large positive effect on the functional segments, which, for example, is very important for athletes in terms of the optimal amount of movement in a particular segment. Thus, the researchers confirm that in addition to the manipulative effects on the joints, other manipulative effects on the surrounding tissues (massage, active stretching, exercises) are needed to optimize the volume of movement in the larger segment (Schmid, Brunner, Wright & Bachmann, 2008;Sharma et al, 2012;Pedak et al, 2019;Gouttebarge et al, 2017;Nagy et al, 2017).…”

“…The results of researches show the influence of various manipulations and exercises on the mobility, stability, and height of the vertical jump of volleyball players (Leporace et al, 2011;Sharma, Geovinson & Singh Sandhu, 2012;Pedak, Port, Rannama & Bazanov, 2019;Gouttebarge, van Sluis, Verhagen & Zwerver, 2017). During the training process, deviations in the functional state of the athlete's musculoskeletal system from the optimal position are often associated with soft tissue overload, which can lead to incorrect loading of the involved joint in both statics and dynamics.…”