Dynamic Movement Assessment e Functional Movement Screen para predição de lesões: uma revisão sistemática

Autores

  • Priscila dos Santos Bunn Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências do Exercício e do Esporte https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6193-4788
  • Elirez Bezerra da Silva Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências do Exercício e do Esporte

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-2950/17004225032018

Palavras-chave:

Transtornos Traumáticos Cumulativos, Traumatismos em Atletas, Movimento

Resumo

A Dynamic Movement Assessment (DMA™) e o Functional Movement Screening (FMS™) são ferramentas utilizadas para classificar o risco de lesões musculoesqueléticas em indivíduos que praticam exercícios físicos. O objetivo da presente revisão sistemática foi avaliar a associação de DMA™ e FMS™ com o risco de lesões musculoesqueléticas em diferentes atividades físicas, categorizando por análise. Uma pesquisa sem filtros de idioma ou de tempo foi realizada em novembro de 2016 nas bases de dados MEDLINE, Google Scholar, SciELO, SCOPUS, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL e BVS, utilizando as palavras-chave: “predição de lesão”, “risco de lesão”, “sensibilidade”, “especificidade”, “functional movement screening” e “dynamic movement assessment”. Foram incluídos estudos prospectivos que analisaram a associação entre DMA™ e FMS™ com o risco de lesões musculoesqueléticas em atividades físicas. Foram extraídos dos estudos: perfil dos participantes, tamanho da amostra, critérios de classificação da lesão, tempo de seguimento e os resultados apresentados, subdivididos pelo tipo de análise estatística. O risco de viés foi realizado com a Escala Newcastle-Ottawa para estudos de coorte. Não foi encontrado nenhum estudo sobre a DMA™. Foram incluídos 20 estudos, que analisaram um ou mais dos seguintes indicadores: acurácia diagnóstica (VPP, VPN e AUC), razão de chances (OR) ou risco relativo (RR). O FMS™ apresentou sensibilidade=12-99%; especificidade=38-97%; VPP=25-91%; VPN=28-85%; AUC=0,42-0,68; OR=0.53-54.5; e RR=0,16-5,44. O FMS™ apresentou-se como um método preditor de lesões musculoesqueléticas. Entretanto, devido às limitações metodológicas dos estudos, seu uso indiscriminado deve ser evitado.

Downloads

Os dados de download ainda não estão disponíveis.

Referências

Taanila H, Suni JH, Kannus P, Pihlajamäki H, Ruohola J-P, Viskari

J, et al. Risk factors of acute and overuse musculoskeletal injuries

among young conscripts: a population-based cohort study. BMC

Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;16(1):104. doi: 10.1186/s12891-015-0557-7

O’Brien J, Finch CF. The implementation of musculoskeletal

injury-prevention exercise programmes in team ball sports: a

systematic review employing the RE-AIM framework. Sport

Med. 2014:1305-18. doi: 10.1007/s40279-014-0208-4

Taanila H, Suni J, Pihlajamäki H, Mattila VM, Ohrankämmen O,

Vuorinen P, et al. Aetiology and risk factors of musculoskeletal

disorders in physically active conscripts: a follow-up study in the

finnish defence forces. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010;11:146.

doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-146

McCunn R, Aus der Fünten K, Fullagar HHK, McKeown I, Meyer

T. Reliability and association with injury of movement screens: a

critical review. Sport Med. 2015;1-19. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0453-1

Nessler TD, Dunn EH. Dynamic movement assessment: prevent

injury and enhance performance kindle edition. Publiwide,

USA, 2014

Parkkari J, Taanila H, Suni J, Mattila VM, Ohrankämmen O,

Vuorinen P, et al. Neuromuscular training with injury prevention

counselling to decrease the risk of acute musculoskeletal

injury in young men during military service: a populationbased, randomised study. BMC Med. 2011;9(1):35. doi:

1186/1741-7015-9-35

Munro A, Herrington L, Carolan M. Reliability of 2-dimensional

video assessment of frontal-plane dynamic knee valgus

during common athletic screening tasks. J Sport Rehabil.

;21:7-11.

Gwynne CR, Curran SA. Quantifying frontal plane knee motion

during single limb squats: reliability and validity of 2-dimensional

measures. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014;9(7):898-906.

Cook G, Burton L, Hoogenboom B. Pre-participation screening:

the use of fundamental movements as an assessment of

function – part 1. N Am J Sports Phys Ther. 2006;1(2):62-72.

Schneiders AG, Davidsson A, Hörman E, Sullivan SJ. Functional

movement screen normative values in a young, active

population. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2011;6(2):75-82.

Kiesel K, Plisky PJ, Voight ML, Glaws KR, Juneau CM, Becker LC,

et al. Can serious injury in professional football be predicted by

a preseason functional movement screen? North Am J Sport

Phys Ther. 2007;2(3):147-58.

McCall A, Davison M, Andersen TE, Beasley I, Bizzini M, Dupont

G, et al. Injury prevention strategies at the FIFA 2014 World

Cup: perceptions and practices of the physicians from the 32

participating national teams. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(9):603-8.

doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-094747

Kraus K, Schültz E, Taylor WR, Doyscher R. Efficacy of the

functional movement screen: a review. J Strength Cond Res.

;28(12):3571-84. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000556

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 metaanalysis. Sport Heal A Multidiscip Approach. 2015;7(6):532-7.

doi: 10.1177/1941738115607445

Krumrei K, Flanagan M, Bruner J, Durall C. The accuracy of

the functional movement screenTM to identify individuals with

an elevated risk of musculoskeletal injury. J Sport Rehabil.

;23(4):360-4. doi: 10.1123/jsr.2013-0027

McCall A, Carling C, Davison M, Nedelec M, Le Gall F, Berthoin

S, et al. Injury risk factors, screening tests and preventative

strategies: a systematic review of the evidence that underpins

the perceptions and practices of 44 football (soccer) teams from

various premier leagues. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(9):583-9.

doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2014-094104

Hoffman MD, Krishnan E. Health and exercise-related medical

issues among 1,212 ultramarathon runners: baseline findings

from the Ultrarunners Longitudinal TRAcking (ULTRA) Study.

PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e83867. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083867

Knapik JJ, Ang P, Reynolds K, Jones B. Physical fitness,

age, and injury incidence in infantry soldiers. J Occup Med.

;35(6):598-603.

Knapik JJ, Graham B, Cobbs J, Thompson D, Steelman R, Jones

BH. A prospective investigation of injury incidence and injury

risk factors among army recruits in military police training. BMC

Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-32

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Grp P. Preferred

reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the

PRISMA statement (Reprinted from Annals of Internal Medicine).

Phys Ther. 2009;89(9):873-80. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

Wells GA, Shea B, Connell DO, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M,

et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the

quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses [Internet].

Bushman TT, Grier TL, Canham-Chervak M, Anderson MK, North

WJ, Jones BH. The Functional Movement Screen and injury risk:

association and predictive value in active men. Am J Sports

Med. 2016;44(2):297-304. doi: 10.1177/0363546515614815

Lisman P, O’Connor FG, Deuster PA, Knapik JJ. Functional

movement screen and aerobic fitness predict injuries in

military training. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2013;45(4):636-43.

doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31827a1c4c

Kodesh E, Shargal E, Kislev-Cohen R, Funk S, Dorfman L,

Samuelly G, et al. Examination of the effectiveness of predictors

for musculoskeletal injuries in female soldiers. J Sport Sci Med.

;515-21.

Butler RJ, Contreras M, Burton LC, Plisky PJ, Goode A, Kiesel K.

Modifiable risk factors predict injuries in firefighters during training

academies. Work. 2013;46(1):11-7. doi: 10.3233/WOR-121545

McGill SM, Frost DM, Lam T, Finlay T, Darby K, Cannon J. Can

fitness and movement quality prevent back injury in elite task

force police officers? A 5-year longitudinal study. Ergonomics.

;139:1-8. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1035760

O’Connor FG, Deuster PA, Davis J, Pappas CG, Knapik JJ.

Functional movement screening: Predicting injuries in officer

candidates. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(12):2224-30.

doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318223522d

Warren M, Smith CA, Chimera NJ. Association of the Functional

Movement Screen with injuries in division I athletes. J Sport

Rehabil. 2015;24:163-70. doi: 10.1123/jsr.2013-0141.

Tee JC, Klingbiel JFG, Collins R, Lambert M, Coopoo Y.

Preseason Functional Movement Screen component

tests predict severe contact injuries in professional rugby

union players. J Strength Cond Res. 2016; 30(11):3194-203.

doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001422

Azzam MG, Throckmorton TW, Smith RA, Graham D, Scholler

J, Azar FM. The Functional Movement Screen as a predictor

of injury in professional basketball players. Curr Orthop Pract.

;26(6):619-23. doi: 10.1097/BCO.0000000000000296

Clay H, Mansell J, Tierney R. Association between rowing

injuries and the functional movement screen in female collegiate

division I rowers. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2016;11(3):345–9.

Bardenett SM, Micca JJ, DeNoyelles JT, Miller SD, Jenk DT,

Brooks GS. Functional Movement Screen normative values

and validity in high school athletes: can the FMSTM be used as

a predictor of injury? Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2015;10(3):303-8.

Hammes D, Aus der Fünten K, Bizzini M, Meyer T. Injury prediction

in veteran football players using the Functional Movement

ScreenTM. J Sports Sci [Internet]. 2016;34(14):1371-9. Available

from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26939907.

doi: doi: 10.1080/02640414.2016.1152390

Kiesel KB, Butler RJ, Plisky PJ. Prediction of injury by limited

and asymmetrical fundamental movement patterns in

american football players. J Sport Rehabil. 2014;23(2):88-94.

doi: 10.1123/jsr.2012-0130

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. N Am J Sports Phys

Ther. 2010;5(2):47-54

Dossa K, Cashman G, Howitt S, West B, Murray N. Can injury

in major junior hockey players be predicted by a pre-season

functional movement screen – a prospective cohort study.

J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2014;58(4):421-7.

Weise W, Boone J, Mattacola C, McKeon P, Lee T. Determination

of the functional movement screen to predict musculoskeletal

injury in intercollegiate athletics – PROQUEST. Athl Train Sport

Healthc. 2014;6(4):161-9. doi: 10.3928/19425864-20140717-01

Garrison M, Westrick R, Johnson MR, Benenson J. Association

between the functional movement screen and injury

development in college athletes. Int J Sports Phys Ther.

;10(1):21-8.

Mokha M, Sprague PA, Gatens DR. Predicting musculoskeletal

injury in national collegiate athletic association division II

athletes from asymmetries and individual-test versus composite

functional movement screen scores. J Athl Train. 2016;51(2).

doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-51.2.07

Martin AC, Olivier B, Benjamin N. The Functional Movement Screen

in the prediction of injury in adolescent cricket pace bowlers:

an observational study. J Sport Rehabil. 2017;26(5):386-95.

doi: 10.1123/jsr.2016-0073

Chen H, Cohen P, Chen S. How big is a big odds ratio?

Interpreting the magnitudes of odds ratios in epidemiological

studies. Commun Stat – Simul Comput. 2010;39(4):860-4.

doi: 10.1080/03610911003650383

Hägglund M, Waldén M, Bahr R, Ekstrand J. Methods for

epidemiological study of injuries to professional football players:

developing the UEFA model. Br J Sports Med. 2005;39(6):340-6.

doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2005.018267

Oliveira M, Gomes A, Toscano C. QUADAS and

STARD: Evaluating the quality of diagnostic accuracy

studies. Rev Saude Publica. 2011;45(2):416-22.

doi: 10.1590/S0034-89102011000200021

Leeflang MMG, Deeks JJ, Gatsonis C, Bossuyt PMM. Systematic reviews

of diagnostic test accuracy. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(12):889-97.

doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-149-12-200812160-00008

Margulis A, Pladevall M, Riera-guardia N, Varas-lorenzo C,

Hazell L, Berkman N, et al. Quality assessment of observational

studies in a drug-safety systematic review, Comparison of two

tools: The Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the RTI item bank. Clin

Epidemiol. 2014;6:981-93. doi: 10.2147/CLEP.S66677

Frost DM, Beach TA, Callaghan JP MS. FMS Scores Change With

Performers’ Knowledge of the grading criteria-are general wholebody movement screens capturing “dysfunction”? J Strength Cond

Res. 2015;29(11):3037-44. doi: 10.1097/JSC.0000000000000211

Downloads

Publicado

2018-09-09

Edição

Seção

Revisão Sistemática

Como Citar

Dynamic Movement Assessment e Functional Movement Screen para predição de lesões: uma revisão sistemática. (2018). Fisioterapia E Pesquisa, 25(3), 352-361. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-2950/17004225032018