Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2017 Mar;45(3):725-732.
doi: 10.1177/0363546516641937. Epub 2016 Jul 21.

Reliability, Validity, and Injury Predictive Value of the Functional Movement Screen: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Nicholas A Bonazza  1 , Dallas Smuin  2 , Cayce A Onks  3 , Matthew L Silvis  3 , Aman Dhawan  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Reliability, Validity, and Injury Predictive Value of the Functional Movement Screen: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Nicholas A Bonazza et al. Am J Sports Med. 2017 Mar.

Abstract

Background: The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is utilized by professional and collegiate sports teams and the military for the prevention of musculoskeletal injuries.

Hypothesis: The FMS demonstrates good interrater and intrarater reliability and validity and has predictive value for musculoskeletal injuries.

Study design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using a computerized search of the electronic databases MEDLINE and ScienceDirect in adherence with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Extracted relevant data from each included study were recorded on a standardized form. The Cochran Q statistic was utilized to evaluate study heterogeneity. Pooled quantitative synthesis was performed to measure the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for interrater and intrarater reliability, along with 95% CIs, and odds ratios with 95% CIs for the injury predictive value for a score of ≤14.

Results: Eleven studies for reliability, 5 studies for validity, and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were identified that met inclusion and exclusion criteria; of these, 6 studies for reliability and 9 studies for the injury predictive value were pooled for quantitative synthesis. The ICC for intrarater reliability was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.69-0.92) and for interrater reliability was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70-0.92). The odds of sustaining an injury were 2.74 times with an FMS score of ≤14 (95% CI, 1.70-4.43). Studies for validity demonstrated flaws in both internal and external validity of the FMS.

Conclusion: The FMS has excellent interrater and intrarater reliability. Participants with composite scores of ≤14 had a significantly higher likelihood of an injury compared with those with higher scores, demonstrating the injury predictive value of the test. Significant concerns remain regarding the validity of the FMS.

Keywords: Functional Movement Screen; injury prevention.

PubMed Disclaimer