Functional Movement Screen Detected Asymmetry & Normative Values Among College-Aged Students.
Craig R Triplett, Bryan S Dorrel, Matthew L Symonds and 3 others
PMID 33842040WHAT IT FOUND
Students who played more sports in high school had fewer movement asymmetries on the Functional Movement Screen.
Those without asymmetries played three sports on average, while those with asymmetries played two. However, sport variety only explained 8% of the variation in total movement scores.
Key findings
01Participants without detected asymmetries played more sports in high school than those with asymmetries (mean 3 vs 2 sports).
02The number of sports played showed a statistically significant but weak relationship with the total Functional Movement Screen score, explaining only 8% of the variability.
03Over half of the college students (57 of 100) demonstrated at least one movement asymmetry on the Functional Movement Screen.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study did not control for how much time had passed since the participants graduated high school, so recent vs. distant sports experience was mixed. Physical activity outside the university class, such as club sports or independent exercise, was not assessed. Previous injuries or surgeries were not recorded, which could influence movement patterns. The relationship between sport variety and movement scores was weak, explaining only a small fraction of the results. The study did not track actual injuries, so it cannot confirm that having fewer asymmetries reduces injury risk.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that playing multiple sports prevents injury or guarantees better movement. The study only showed a small statistical link between sport variety and fewer asymmetries on a screening test, not on actual injury outcomes, and the effect was weak.