The Functional Movement Screen
The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is a tool designed to evaluate an individual's movement patterns to identify imbalances, weaknesses, or limitations that may predispose them to injury.
The FMS was developed in the late 1990s by Gray Cook, a physical therapist and strength coach, and Dr. Lee Burton, an athletic trainer. The goal was to create a practical and standardised system for evaluating movement patterns that are foundational to athletic activities. Cook and Burton hypothesised that many injuries stem from poor movement quality and compensatory patterns. Their work emphasised that improving fundamental movement efficiency provides the base for building strength, speed, and power. By addressing limitations or asymmetries early, coaches and practitioners could enhance performance and reduce injury risk.
The FMS is a systematic tool used to evaluate movement quality through seven fundamental movement patterns: Deep Squat, Hurdle Step, Inline Lunge, Shoulder Mobility, Active Straight-Leg Raise, Trunk Stability Push-Up, and Rotary Stability.
Each movement is scored on a scale of 0 to 3, where:
3: The movement is performed perfectly without compensation.
2: The movement is completed but with some form of compensation or imperfection.
1: The athlete cannot complete the movement.
0: Pain occurs during the movement, indicating the need for further assessment.
The total score ranges from 0 to 21, with lower scores highlighting movement dysfunctions or asymmetries that could increase injury risk or limit performance. Despite some meta-analyses suggesting that athletes achieving scores lower than 14 are at higher risk of injury, the evidence supporting this is considered weak.
Screening Exercises
1. Deep Squat
The squat is a foundational movement for many track and field events, serving as a "ready position" for explosive power and force generation. The deep squat test evaluates total body mechanics, focusing on the symmetrical mobility of the hips, knees, and ankles, while the overhead dowel assesses shoulder and thoracic spine mobility. For example, in the pole vault, the ability to generate power during the plant and take-off phase relies heavily on lower body mobility and strength, as well as upper body stability and extension. The deep squat highlights key movement qualities like pelvic rhythm, ankle dorsiflexion, and thoracic extension, which are essential for optimal performance in this highly dynamic event.
Scoring Chart
3: Hips go below parallel, heels stay on the ground, the dowel remains overhead without tilting forward, and the torso stays upright.
2: Hips do not go below parallel, heels may lift, or the dowel tilts forward, indicating compensations.
1: Unable to perform the squat to any meaningful depth even with compensations.
0: Pain occurs during the movement.
2. Hurdle Step
The hurdle step challenges stride mechanics, requiring coordination and stability between the hips and torso, as well as single-leg balance and control. This test assesses the mobility and stability of the hips, knees, and ankles while highlighting the athlete’s ability to maintain dynamic balance. For example, in hurdling events, athletes rely on precise stride mechanics and single-leg stability to clear barriers efficiently. The hurdle step test reflects these demands, requiring stance-leg stability through the ankle, knee, and hip, and step-leg mobility with proper knee and hip flexion and ankle dorsiflexion, mimicking the actions critical for success in hurdling.
Scoring Chart
3: The hips, knees, and ankles align as the leg steps over the hurdle; the dowel remains level, and there’s no compensation.
2: Alignment is off slightly, the dowel tilts, or the movement lacks control.
1: Cannot perform the movement with control, balance, or alignment.
0: Pain occurs during the movement.
3. Inline Lunge
The inline lunge mimics the stresses experienced during rotational, decelerating, and lateral movements, placing the body in a scissored stance to assess alignment and stability. It evaluates mobility and stability in the torso, shoulders, hips, and ankles, as well as flexibility in the quadriceps and rectus femoris. For example, during a javelin throw, the athlete must decelerate and stabilise through the lower body while transferring rotational force through the torso. The inline lunge highlights the athlete’s ability to maintain ankle, knee, and hip stability on the stance leg, as well as mobility and flexibility in the step leg, both critical for optimal performance and injury prevention in throwing events.
Scoring Chart
3: Dowel remains in contact with the back (head, upper back, and sacrum), the movement is controlled, and the knee touches the floor without losing balance.
2: There is a loss of alignment, balance, or dowel contact, but the lunge is completed.
1: Unable to complete the movement or loses significant balance.
0: Pain occurs during the movement.
4. Shoulder Mobility
The shoulder mobility test evaluates bilateral shoulder range of motion by combining movements like internal rotation with adduction and external rotation with abduction. It also assesses scapular mobility and thoracic spine extension. For example, in the discus throw, athletes rely on a full range of shoulder motion and thoracic extension to generate power and achieve a smooth release. The shoulder mobility test highlights potential limitations in these areas, ensuring that throwers have the necessary flexibility and control to execute dynamic movements while minimising the risk of shoulder injuries.
Scoring Chart
3: Fists come within one hand length (thumb to middle finger distance) of each other.
2: Fists are within 1.5 hand lengths of each other.
1: Fists are more than 1.5 hand lengths apart.
0: Pain occurs during the movement.
Shoulder Clearing Test (part of this assessment)
Performed by having the athlete place their hand on the opposite shoulder and elevate the elbow. If pain is present, the shoulder mobility score defaults to 0, regardless of distance.
5. Active Straight-Leg Raise
The active straight-leg raise evaluates an athlete’s ability to move one leg independently while maintaining a stable pelvis and torso, assessing functional hamstring and gastroc-soleus flexibility. It also tests the mobility of the opposite hip and lower abdominal stability. For example, in sprinting, functional hamstring flexibility is essential for powerful leg swings and efficient stride mechanics. This test highlights any limitations in hamstring mobility or core stability that could impact performance or increase the risk of hamstring strain, ensuring sprinters are prepared for the demands of high-speed running.
Scoring Chart
3: The non-lifting leg remains flat on the ground, and the raised leg achieves an angle of 80° or greater with the dowel aligned between the mid-thigh and hip crease.
2: The non-lifting leg remains flat, and the raised leg achieves an angle between 50° and 79° with the dowel aligned between the mid-thigh and knee.
1: The raised leg cannot achieve a 50° angle, or the non-lifting leg compensates by lifting off the ground.
0: Pain occurs during the movement.
6. Trunk Stability Push-Up
The trunk stability push-up assesses an athlete's ability to stabilise the spine in the sagittal plane during an upper-body movement, testing core strength and control. This test evaluates how effectively the trunk can transfer force between the upper and lower extremities. For example, in the pole vault, core stability is essential for efficiently transferring power from the legs to the upper body during the plant and take-off phases. A lack of trunk stability can lead to energy loss and reduced performance, making this test a key indicator of an athlete's readiness for explosive, coordinated movements.
Scoring Chart
Men: Perform a push-up with thumbs at forehead level.
Women: Perform a push-up with thumbs at chin level.
3: The push-up is completed with the body moving as a unit and without sagging or compensations.
2: The push-up is completed with compensations, such as sagging hips or poor alignment.
1: Unable to perform the push-up with proper form, even after repositioning the hands.
0: Pain occurs during the movement.
Trunk Stability Clearing Test (part of this assessment)
The athlete performs a cobra stretch. Pain here results in a 0 for the push-up, regardless of performance.
7. Rotary Stability
The rotary stability test evaluates multi-plane trunk stability, requiring precise neuromuscular coordination and efficient energy transfer across the body. It challenges the ability to stabilise asymmetrical upper and lower extremity movements in both the sagittal and transverse planes. For example, in javelin throwing, trunk stabilisers play a critical role in transferring rotational force from the lower body to the throwing arm.
Poor stability in these movements can lead to energy loss and increase the risk of injury, making the rotary stability test an important measure of readiness for high-intensity, asymmetrical athletic tasks.
Scoring Chart
3: Athlete performs a perfect ipsilateral (same-side) movement, keeping the body aligned, with no wobbling or compensation.
2: Athlete performs a contralateral (opposite-side) movement successfully or has some minor form issues during the ipsilateral movement.
1: Cannot perform the movement contralaterally or ipsilaterally or demonstrates significant instability.
0: Pain occurs during the movement.
Rotary Stability Clearing Test (part of this assessment)
Performed by sitting back into a child’s pose. Pain results in a 0, regardless of performance.
Why Might the FMS Be Useful for Track and Field Coaches?
1. Identify Movement Deficiencies
Track and field athletes rely heavily on efficient movement mechanics. The FMS highlights issues like limited mobility, poor stability, or asymmetries that could hinder performance or lead to overuse injuries. For instance:
A hurdler with asymmetry in the hurdle step may be at greater risk of hip or knee injuries.
A sprinter with poor rotary stability might struggle with energy transfer during explosive starts.
2. Inform Targeted Interventions
The FMS provides actionable data to guide corrective exercises. For example:
An athlete with limited ankle dorsiflexion identified during the deep squat can work on mobility drills to improve their squat depth and running mechanics.
Shoulder mobility deficits can inform upper body mobility or stabilisation exercises for throwers.
3. Monitor Progress Over Time
Repeating the FMS at regular intervals allows coaches to track improvements in movement quality and assess the effectiveness of training programs.
4. Support Injury Prevention Strategies
While the FMS cannot predict injuries, addressing identified movement deficiencies can help reduce the risk of overuse or repetitive strain injuries, common in track and field athletes.
Limitations of the FMS
1. Not a Predictor of Performance or Injury
While higher FMS scores are associated with better movement quality, they do not directly predict athletic performance or guarantee injury prevention.
The FMS should be viewed as a screening tool, not a diagnostic or performance test.
2. Limited Sensitivity
The 0–21 scoring system may oversimplify complex movement patterns, making it less sensitive compared to continuous performance metrics.
3. Variability in Execution
The effectiveness of the FMS depends on the assessor’s experience and consistency. Improper scoring or inconsistent evaluations can reduce its reliability.
4. Context and Age Factors
FMS results may be influenced by an athlete’s biological maturation, particularly in youth athletes. This variability should be considered when interpreting results.
5. Does Not Address All Athletic Demands
The FMS focuses on fundamental movement patterns, which are a foundation but do not encompass sport-specific skills or dynamic performance metrics like power, speed, or endurance.
How Can You Implement the FMS with Your Squad?
Preseason Screenings
Conduct FMS assessments during preseason to establish a baseline for each athlete.
Use results to design individualised corrective exercise programs.
Track Improvements
Reassess athletes midseason and post-season to monitor changes and refine interventions.
Education and Collaboration
Educate athletes about the importance of movement quality.
Collaborate with physiotherapists or strength coaches to ensure targeted and effective corrective strategies.
The Functional Movement Screen is a valuable tool for track and field coaches seeking to enhance their athletes' movement quality, identify weaknesses, and support injury prevention efforts. However, it is important to remember that the FMS is just one component of a comprehensive athlete development plan. When used appropriately, alongside performance testing and qualitative coaching insights, the FMS can contribute to a holistic approach to training and performance.
By understanding its strengths and limitations, coaches can implement the FMS effectively to support their athletes’ long-term development and success.