RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 The functional movement test 9+ is a poor screening test for lower extremity injuries in professional male football players: a 2-year prospective cohort study
JF British Journal of Sports Medicine
JO Br J Sports Med
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Association of Sport and Exercise Medicine
SP 1047
OP 1053
DO 10.1136/bjsports-2016-097307
VO 52
IS 16
A1 Bakken, Arnhild
A1 Targett, Stephen
A1 Bere, Tone
A1 Eirale, Cristiano
A1 Farooq, Abdulaziz
A1 Tol, Johannes L
A1 Whiteley, Rod
A1 Khan, Karim M
A1 Bahr, Roald
YR 2018
UL http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/52/16/1047.abstract
AB Background The 9+ screening battery test consists of 11 tests to assess limitations in functional movement.Aim To examine the association of the 9+ with lower extremity injuries and to identify a cut-off point to predict injury risk.Methods Professional male football players in Qatar from 14 teams completed the 9+ at the beginning of the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons. Time-loss injuries and exposure in training and matches were registered prospectively by club medical staff during these seasons. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to calculate HR and 95% CI. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated to determine sensitivity and specificity and identify the optimal cut-off point for risk assessment.Results 362 players completed the 9+ and had injury and exposure registration. There were 526 injuries among 203 players (56.1%) during the two seasons; injuries to the thigh were the most frequent. There was no association between 9+ total score and the risk of lower extremity injuries (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.05, p=0.13), even after adjusting for other risk factors in a multivariate analysis (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.04, p=0.37). ROC curve analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.48, and there was no cut-off point that distinguished injured from non-injured players.Conclusion The 9+ was not associated with lower extremity injury, and it was no better than chance for distinguishing between injured and uninjured players. Therefore, the 9+ test cannot be recommended as an injury prediction tool in this population.