© RockyMountain HPC, Inc.

© RockyMountain HPC, Inc.

Optimal Performance

Movement Strategies

Optimal Performance

Pyramid

Functional Movement

 Mobility

 ROM / Flexibility

 Stability

 Core stability / Neuromuscular Control

 Assessment

 FMS

Key/critical question?

 Are we building strength and conditioning, rehab, fitness and skill on top of dysfunction?

What is FMS

 A series of movements designed to evaluate stability and mobility (i.e.

functional movement)

 Uses extreme positions where weaknesses and imbalances become noticeable

 Ultimate goal is to identify athletes at increased risk for injury

Developed by:

Gray Cook….

What is SFMA ^?

 Comprehensive assessment system

 Used to classify movement patterns

 Direct manual therapy and therapeutic exercise

interventions Developed

by:

Gray Cook

U. Miami, FL

Greg Rose

TPI

Mike

Voight

Belmont U, TN

Phillip Plisky

U. Evansville, IN

Kyle Kiesel

U. Evansville, IN

Key Principles



Optimum function movement (relative)



Balance between mobility and stability



Tightness = weakness



Example:

o Hamstrings seemingly become

tight when the core is too weak to control the pelvis

o Targeting the tightness only will

result in a short term gain at best

Functional Movement Screen

 Consists of 7 tasks (3clearing maneuvers)

 Scored 0 (lowest) through III (highest)

 Lowest score counts on bilateral tests

 Best possible score = 21 ?

 Discuss data currently available

 Athletes

 Municipal workers

 Comparison

 Stand-alone vs. additional

physiological measures (West Point)

Functional Movement Screen

 Deep Squat

 Hurdle Step

 In-line Lunge

 Shoulder Mobility

 Active Straight Leg Raise

 Trunk Stability Push Up

 Rotary Stability

3 clearing maneuvers

Scoring the FMS

 III – able to complete task

 II able to complete task with compensation

 I – unable to complete task

 0 – pain during test (or clearing exam)

 Max Score = 21points

 Also looking for asymmetry

Asymmetry

 Musculoskeletal asymmetry is a well established risk factor for injury

 Ekstrand & Gillquist, 1983

 Knapik et al., 1991

 Baumhauer et al., 1995

 Plisky et al., 2006

 Myer et al., 2008

 Yeung et al., 2009

Research

 J Occup Med Toxicol. Apr. 2007

 433 firefighters

 62% reduction in lost time with intervention

 42% reduction in 12 month injury rate

 NFL Data

 If FMS score is ≤ 14, and there is an

asymmetry, then the probability of suffering a time loss injury increased from 15% (pre- test probability) to just over 50%

 Scores can be improved with a specific off season training program (SFMA).

Research

 Intrarater and Interrater Reliability

 Minick, KI, Kiesal, KB, Burton, L, Taylor, A, Plisky, P, and Butler, RJ. Interrater reliability of the Functional Movement Screen. J

Strength Cond Res 24(2): 479-486, 2010

 Teyhen, DS, Donofry DF, Shaffer SW, Walker MJ, Lorenson CL, Dugan JL, Halfpap JP, Childs MD. Functional Movement Screen: a

reliability study in service members.

USArmeh Med Dep J. 2010 Jul-Sept:71

References

 Cook, Gray Athlete Body in Balance, 2003

 Gray, Gary Gray Institute / Nike

 Kraemer, William, University of Connecticut

 Michaud, Tom Human Locomotion, 2010

 Prentise, Bill., UNC Chapel Hill

 Rose, Greg TPI

 Starrett, Kelly The Supple Leopard, 2013

 Tiberio, David University of Connecticut

Balance and Asymmetry FMS

Improving Performance

and Avoiding Injury by

Eliminating Asymmetries

Understanding Balance

 Where does Athletic Movement originate?

 How does it Respond?

 How can it be Improved?

Testing For Asymmetries

 Functional Movement Screen

 Performing the Screen

Deep Squat

 The deep squat challenges total body mechanics when performed properly

 Assess bilateral, symmetrical and

functional mobility of the hips, knees and ankles.

 assess bilateral, symmetrical mobility of the shoulders

as well as the thoracic spine.

Hurdle Step

In-Line Lunge

Active Straight Leg Raise

Trunk Stability Push-Up

Shoulder Mobility Test

Rotary Stability

Score the test

Design the program

Specific Guidelines – Exercise Selection

 Proprioceptively rich program

 Safe

 Challenging

 Stress multiple planes

 Incorporate multi-sensory environment

 Activity specific

 Progressive functional continuum

Slow to fast

Simple to complex

Known to unknown

Low force to high force

Eyes open to eyes closed

Static to dynamic

 Goal of program - develop optimal levels of functional strength & stabilization

Focus on neural adaptations instead of absolute strength gains

Increase proprioceptive demands

Quality not quantity

 Poor technique and neuromuscular control results in poor motor patterns & stabilization (injury)

 Focus on function

Goal

s

Questions to Ask Yourself

 Is it dynamic?

 Is it multiplanar?

 Is it multidimensional?

 Is it proprioceptively enriched?

 Is it systematic?

 Is it progressive?

 Is it activity-specific?

 Is it based on functional anatomy & science?