An Examination of the Relationship Between the Functional Movement Screen, Landing Error Scoring System, and 3D Kinematic Data During a Drop Jump Task.

ABSTRACT: Everard, E, Lyons, M, and Harrison, AJ. An examination of the relationship between the functional movement screen, landing error scoring system and 3D kinematic data during a drop jump task. J Strength Cond Res 35(11): 3012-3020, 2021-Tests such as the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) and Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) have become an established component of preparticipation screening. Despite their practical use, there is a lack of empirical evidence examining their relationship to established assessments of movement, such as 3D kinematics of a drop jump. Fifty-two male collegiate athletes undertook the LESS, FMS, and a drop jump where 3D lower-limb kinematic variables were assessed. Spearman correlations were conducted to examine the relationship between LESS, FMS, and drop-jump 3D kinematic variables. A series of independent t-tests examined differences in hip and knee kinematic variables in acceptable and poor FMS and LESS groups as determined by established cut-off scores. Landing Error Scoring System scores had significant moderate correlations with most kinematic variables (r = 0.35-0.64; p < 0.01). Subjects with poor LESS scores displayed significantly worse lower-limb kinematics compared with their high-scoring counterparts (effect size = 1.99-2.76, large effect). There were significant moderate correlations with maximal hip and knee flexion (r = 0.46 and 0.39 respectively; p < 0.01) and small or nonsignificant correlations between all other kinematic variables and FMS scores. Hip flexion and knee valgus at maximal displacement were the only kinematic variables significantly different between FMS groups (ES = 0.70-0.72, small-to-moderate effect). The results confirm limitations in the ability of the FMS to distinguish between groups for landing biomechanics.

Examining the Reliability of the Landing Error Scoring System With Raters Using the Standardized Instructions and Scoring Sheet.

CONTEXT: Dynamic movement-based screens, such as the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS), are becoming more widely used in research and practical settings. Currently, 3 studies have examined the reliability of the LESS. These studies have reported good interrater and intrarater reliability. However, all 3 studies involved raters, who were founders of the LESS. Therefore, it is unclear whether the reliability reported reflects that which would be observed with practitioners without such specialized and intimate knowledge of the screen and only using the standardized set of instructions. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the interrater and intrarater reliability of the final score and the individual scoring criteria of the LESS. DESIGN: Reliability protocol. SETTING: Controlled laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Two raters scored 30 male participants (age = 21.8 [3.9] y; height = 1.75 [0.46] m; mass = 75.5 [6.6] kg) involved in a variety of college sports. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Two raters using only the standardized scoring sheet assessed the interrater reliability of the total score and individual scoring criteria independently of each other. The principal author scored the videos again 6 weeks later for the intrarater reliability component of the study. INTERVENTION: Participants performed a drop box landing from a 30-cm box was recorded with a video camera from the front and side views. RESULTS: The intraclass coefficients interrater and intrarater reliability for the total scores were excellent (intraclass coefficients range = .95 and .96; SEM = 1.01 and 1.02). The individual scoring criteria of the LESS had between moderate and perfect agreement using kappa statistics (κ = .41-1.0). CONCLUSION: The final score and individual scoring criteria of the LESS have acceptable reliability with raters using the standardized scoring sheet. Practitioners using only the standardized scoring sheet should feel confident that the LESS is a reliable tool.

Examining the association of injury with the Functional Movement Screen and Landing Error Scoring System in military recruits undergoing 16 weeks of introductory fitness training.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the association of injury with the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) and Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) in military recruits undergoing an intensive 16-week training block. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-two entry-level male soldiers (18-25years) were tested using the FMS and LESS. The participants underwent an intensive 16-week training program with injury data recorded daily. Chi-squared statistics were used to examine associations between injury risk and (1) poor LESS scores, (2) any score of 1 on the FMS and (3) composite FMS score of ≤14. RESULTS: A composite FMS score of ≤14 was not a significant predictor of injury. LESS scores of >5 and having a score of 1 on any FMS test were significantly associated with injury. LESS scores had greater relative risk, sensitivity and specificity (2.2 (95% CI=1.48-3.34); 71% and 87% respectively) than scores of 1 on the FMS (relative risk=1.32 (95% CI=1.0-1.7); sensitivity=50% and specificity=76%). CONCLUSIONS: There was no association between composite FMS score and injury but LESS scores and scores of 1 in the FMS test were significantly associated with injury in varying degrees. LESS scores had a much better association with injury than both any scores of 1 on the FMS and a combination of LESS scores and scores of 1 on the FMS. Furthermore, the LESS provides comparable information related to injury risk as other well-established markers associated with injury such as age, muscular strength and previous injury.

Examining the Relationship Between the Functional Movement Screen and the Landing Error Scoring System in an Active, Male Collegiate Population.

Everard, EM, Harrison, AJ, and Lyons, M. Examining the relationship between the functional movement screen and the landing error scoring system in an active, male collegiate population. J Strength Cond Res 31(5): 1265-1272, 2017-In recent years, there has been an increasing focus on movement screening as the principal aspect of preparticipation testing. Two of the most common movement screening tools are the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) and the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS). Several studies have examined the reliability and validity of these tools, but so far, there have been no studies comparing the results of these 2 screening tools against each other. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between FMS scores and LESS scores. Ninety-eight male college athletes actively competing in sport (Gaelic games, soccer, athletics, boxing/mixed martial arts, Olympic weightlifting) participated in the study and performed the FMS and LESS screens. Both the 21-point and 100-point scoring systems were used to score the FMS. Spearman's correlation coefficients were used to determine the relationship between the 2 screening scores. The results showed a significant moderate correlation between FMS and LESS scores (rho 100 and 21 point = -0.528; -0.487; p < 0.001). In addition, r values of 0.26 and 0.23 indicate a poor shared variance between the 2 screens. The results indicate that performing well in one of the screens does not necessarily equate to performing well in the other. This has practical implications as it highlights that both screens may assess different movement patterns and should not be used as a substitute for each other.