year 6, Issue 4 (Winter 2018)                   2018, 6(4): 9-15 | Back to browse issues page


XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Tabatabaei S M, Daneshmandi H, Norasteh A A, Sharif Nia H. Functional Movement Screening Tests for the Prediction of Injuries in Volleyball: A Qualitative Study. Annals of Applied Sport Science. 2018; 6 (4) :9-15
URL: http://aassjournal.com/article-1-650-en.html
1- Department of Sport Injuries and Corrective Exercises, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran , majid.tabatabaea@yahoo.com
2- Department of Sport Injuries and Corrective Exercises, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
3- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
Abstract:   (1158 Views)
Background. There is little evidence to support the comprehensiveness of FMS in sports populations to predict injuries. Ignoring rapid decelerations and high eccentric forces which may be characteristics of high risk for injury are evident in these tests. With this in mind, it seems logical to use tests to assess the performance of athletes so as to evaluate speed components as well as to identify the potential risk factors for injury. This can be a good complement to FMS.
Objectives. This study aimed to identify functional movement screening tests to predict injuries in volleyball.
Methods. In this descriptive study, 20 high-level experts in volleyball were selected through purposive sampling. The data were collected in 2017 through semi-structured interviews and field notes. The interview transcripts were encoded using MAXQDA10 software®. To extract the categories and subjects, the thematic analysis approach was used.
Results. In the first analysis process, the initial codes were extracted and finally, 38 of the 82 existing potential tests were identified. Then, after various stages of determining the validity and reliability of 12 tests—deep squat, inline lunge, trunk stability push up, rotary stability, shoulder mobility, triple hop for distance, hexagon, lateral lunge, triple jump for distance, sidearm medicine ball throw, closed kinetic chain upper extremity and squat jump—were identified for inclusion in this tool.
Conclusions. Based on the results of the interviews, it could be concluded that the interviewees’ choices were based more on the tests’ similarity with the type of movement patterns and performance capabilities in volleyball and considering the anatomical areas prone to injury as well.
Full-Text [PDF 771 kb]   (279 Downloads)    
 
 
APPLICABLE REMARKS
• In the future, this tool can be used as an interventional instrument in volleyball by defining the normative values for tests and determining a cutoff point.
• It is suggested that the results of this research could be used in prospective studies pertaining to various volleyball levels in order to determine the extent to which this tool is capable of predicting injuries.

Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: Kinesiology and Sport Injuries
Received: 2018/06/6 | Accepted: 2018/08/9 | ePublished ahead of print: 2019/01/11 | Published: 2019/01/11

References
1. Cook G, Burton L, Hoogenboom BJ, Voight M. Functional movement screening: the use of fundamental movements as an assessment of function‐part 1. International journal of sports physical therapy. 2014;9(3):396. [PMID] [PMCID]
2. Kiesel K, Plisky PJ, Voight ML. Can serious injury in professional football be predicted by a preseason functional movement screen? North American journal of sports physical therapy: NAJSPT. 2007;2(3):147. [PMID]
3. Dorrel BS, Long T, Shaffer S, Myer GD. Evaluation of the functional movement screen as an injury prediction tool among active adult populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports health. 2015;7(6):532-7. [DOI:10.1177/1941738115607445] [PMID] [PMCID]
4. Warren M, Smith CA, Chimera NJ. Association of the functional movement screen with injuries in division I athletes. Journal of sport rehabilitation. 2015;24(2):163-70. [DOI:10.1123/jsr.2013-0141] [PMID]
5. Bishop C, Read P, Walker S, Turner AN. Assessing movement using a variety of screening tests. Professional Strength & Conditioning. 2015(37):17-26.
6. Parchmann CJ, McBride JM. Relationship between functional movement screen and athletic performance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2011;25(12):3378-84. [DOI:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318238e916] [PMID]
7. Bishop C. Movement screening: An integrated approach to assessing movement quality. Advanced Strength and Conditioning: An Evidence-based Approach. 2017.
8. Mottram S, Comerford M. A new perspective on risk assessment. Physical Therapy in Sport. 2008;9(1):40-51. [DOI:10.1016/j.ptsp.2007.11.003] [PMID]
9. Dallinga JM, Benjaminse A, Lemmink KA. Which screening tools can predict injury to the lower extremities in team sports? Sports medicine. 2012;42(9):791-815. [DOI:10.1007/BF03262295] [PMID]
10. Morehead EK. Development of a Functional Movement Screening Tool for Football: University of Central Lancashire; 2014. [PMCID]
11. Sleeper MD, Kenyon LK, Casey E. Measuring fitness in female gymnasts: the gymnastics functional measurement tool. International journal of sports physical therapy. 2012;7(2):124. [PMID] [PMCID]
12. Gabbe BJ, Finch CF, Wajswelner H, Bennell KL. Predictors of lower extremity injuries at the community level of Australian football. Clinical journal of sport medicine. 2004;14(2):56-63. [DOI:10.1097/00042752-200403000-00002] [PMID]
13. Steinberg N, Hershkovitz I, Peleg S, Dar G, Masharawi Y, Heim M, et al. Range of joint movement in female dancers and nondancers aged 8 to 16 years: anatomical and clinical implications. The American journal of sports medicine. 2006;34(5):814-23. [DOI:10.1177/0363546505281805] [PMID]
14. Bere T, Kruczynski J, Veintimilla N, Hamu Y, Bahr R. Injury risk is low among world-class volleyball players: 4-year data from the FIVB Injury Surveillance System. British journal of sports medicine. 2015:bjsports-2015-094959.
15. Verhagen E, Van der Beek AJ, Bouter LM, Bahr R, Van Mechelen W. A one season prospective cohort study of volleyball injuries. British journal of sports medicine. 2004;38(4):477-81. [DOI:10.1136/bjsm.2003.005785] [PMID] [PMCID]
16. Bahr R, Bahr I. Incidence of acute volleyball injuries: a prospective cohort study of injury mechanisms and risk factors. Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports. 1997;7(3):166-71. [DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0838.1997.tb00134.x]
17. Corbin J, Strauss A, Strauss AL. Basics of qualitative research: Sage; 2014.
18. Agbese OO. Examining the relationship between functional movement screen (FMS) and computerized BESS scores and lower extremity injury risk in a cohort of female intercollegiate athletes: University of Delaware; 2016. [PMID]
19. Chorba RS, Chorba DJ, Bouillon LE, Overmyer CA, Landis JA. Use of a functional movement screening tool to determine injury risk in female collegiate athletes. North American journal of sports physical therapy: NAJSPT. 2010;5(2):47. [PMID]
20. Georgoulis AD, Ristanis S, Chouliaras V, Moraiti C, Stergiou N. Tibial rotation is not restored after ACL reconstruction with a hamstring graft. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®. 2007;454:89-94. [DOI:10.1097/BLO.0b013e31802b4a0a] [PMID]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


© 2017 All Rights Reserved | Annals of Applied Sport Science

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb