Cargando…

The relationship between the Functional Movement Screen and the Y Balance Test in youth footballers

BACKGROUND: The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) and the Y Balance Test (Y-BT) are screening tools to detect movement deficits and to identify footballers at high risk of injury. If these tools are able to identify athletes with high risk of injury, they should measure the same construct and also be...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sikora, Damian, Linek, Pawel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9438769/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36061742
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.13906
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) and the Y Balance Test (Y-BT) are screening tools to detect movement deficits and to identify footballers at high risk of injury. If these tools are able to identify athletes with high risk of injury, they should measure the same construct and also be highly correlated. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to determine the relationship between the FMS and Y-BT in youth footballers. The present study also aimed to assess the degree of association between the FMS and Y-BT considering high-injury-risk (FMS <= 14 points and Y-BT <= 89.6%) and low-injury-risk groups (FMS > 14 points and Y-BT > 89.6%). METHOD: A sample of 226 healthy athletes (mean age: 14.0 ± 2.3 years) was selected from a football club. The FMS and Y-BT data were collected from all participants. The Y-BT raw data were normalised to the relative length of the lower limbs. Spearman’s correlation was used in the analysis. RESULTS: For the whole group, there was a moderate correlation (R = 0.41; p < 0.001) between the composite FMS score and composite Y-BT score. The strength of relationships varied from weak to moderate between the FMS subtests and most Y-BT results for each direction. In the high-injury-risk group, there was no correlation (R = 0.11; p = 0.61) between the composite FMS score and composite Y-BT score. For the low-injury-risk group, there was a weak significant correlation (R = 0.27; p < 0.007) between the composite FMS score and composite Y-BT score. Additionally, 56 and 53 athletes were classified to the high-injury-risk group based on the FMS and Y-BT, respectively. Only 23 athletes were classified to the high-risk group by both tests. CONCLUSIONS: Youth footballers showed only weak to moderate correlations between the FMS and the Y-BT. Footballers classified in the high-injury-risk group based on the FMS and Y-BT presented a different relationship between the FMS and Y-BT tasks compared to the low-injury-risk group. The results confirmed that the FMS and Y-BT should not be used interchangeably as they assess different movement deficits in the group of youth football players. The study results may partially suggest that using one of these screening tools cannot successfully predict injury risk in adolescent football players. This justifies the need to use these tests simultaneously to identify possible neuromuscular control deficits in youth footballers.