Functional Movement Quality Clinical Trial
Official title:
Influence of a Corrective Exercise Training Program on Measures of Functional Movement Among Active-Duty Firefighters
The occupation of firefighting is considered to be one of the most dangerous occupations in
the United States (U.S.). As such, a high prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries (MSKIs)
have been observed among the firefighter population. This high rate of MSKI has created an
extremely large financial impact on fire departments across the United States. Therefore,
interest in developing methods of identifying those at risk for developing a future MSKI and
interventions designed to prevent these MSKIs from happening has grown among both the
firefighter population, as well as among researchers and practitioners.
Previous research has demonstrated relationships between MSKI and altered movement patterns.
In addition, researchers have started to demonstrate the ability of functional movement
assessments to predict future MSKI in various populations, including firefighters. Two of
these functional movement assessments include the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) and the
Movement Efficiency (ME) Test, which is a component of the Fusionetics Human Performance
System. These assessments both quantify the overall functional movement quality of an
individual by creating a composite movement score (i.e., Total FMS & Average ME Test scores,
respectively).
In addition, various theoretical models of corrective exercise programming have been
proposed. These programs are designed to restore optimal neuromuscular control and correct
any identified neuromuscular imbalances observed during the movement assessment through the
use of simple and easy-to-follow exercises. The Fusionetics Human Performance System
utilizes one such model, with the goal of improving the functional movement quality of an
individual by correcting the aforementioned neuromuscular deficiencies observed during the
ME Test. Based on this framework, these corrective exercise programs theoretically lower the
risk of MSKI of the individual as well.
However, there is currently a lack of research in the literature examining the influence of
corrective exercise programming on functional movement quality among the active-duty
firefighter population. As such, it remains unknown if a corrective exercise intervention is
capable of significantly improving functional movement quality among active-duty
firefighters. In addition, recent research suggests that various health and fitness measures
are associated with functional movement quality. These measures include total body power
output, lower extremity muscular strength, and core muscular endurance. As such, an
examination of the influence of a corrective exercise intervention on measures of health and
fitness among active-duty firefighters is warranted.
| Status | Active, not recruiting |
| Enrollment | 51 |
| Est. completion date | May 2018 |
| Est. primary completion date | May 2017 |
| Accepts healthy volunteers | Accepts Healthy Volunteers |
| Gender | Both |
| Age group | 18 Years and older |
| Eligibility |
General Eligibility Criteria: Participants will be considered eligible for this study if they: 1. are fluent in speaking and writing English; 2. are at least 18 years of age; 3. they are an active-duty firefighter; 4. are cleared by their fire department for full active-duty work; and 5. have been an active-duty firefighter for at least 12 months (i.e., one year). Inclusion Criteria: Participants will be included into this study if they: 1. do not suffer from chest pain or dizziness; 2. have not been diagnosed with a heart condition; 3. are not currently pregnant; 4. have not had any serious ankle, knee, hip, back, or shoulder trauma that required medical attention in the past 3 months; 5. have not had surgery on their ankle, knee, hip, back, or shoulder within the past year (12 months); or 6. do not have any current bone, joint, or muscle abnormalities that require medical attention; 7. have not been instructed by a physician or their Health and Safety Officer (HSO) to not participate in this study. Exclusion Criteria: 1. Participants will be excluded from being placed into Phase 2 (i.e., the intervention portion) of this study if they are already engaged in a structured corrective exercise program. Furthermore, in order to ensure similar baseline functional movement quality between the CEP and CON groups, participants will be excluded from being placed into the intervention portion of this study if their Overall MET score is < 25 or > 75. |
Allocation: Non-Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Single Blind (Investigator), Primary Purpose: Treatment
| Country | Name | City | State |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | Station 5 | Milwaukee | Wisconsin |
| Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
|---|---|
| University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee |
United States,
Burton, L., Kiesel, K., & Cook, G. (2004). Mobility screening for the core: Interventions. Athletic Therapy Today, 9(6), 52-57.
Butler RJ, Contreras M, Burton LC, Plisky PJ, Goode A, Kiesel K. Modifiable risk factors predict injuries in firefighters during training academies. Work. 2013 Jan 1;46(1):11-7. doi: 10.3233/WOR-121545. — View Citation
Clark, M.A, & Lucett, S.C. (2011). NASM Essentials of Corrective Exercise Training (1st ed.). Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Comerford MJ, Mottram SL. Functional stability re-training: principles and strategies for managing mechanical dysfunction. Man Ther. 2001 Feb;6(1):3-14. Review. — View Citation
Comerford MJ, Mottram SL. Movement and stability dysfunction--contemporary developments. Man Ther. 2001 Feb;6(1):15-26. Review. — View Citation
Cook G, Burton L, Hoogenboom BJ, Voight M. Functional movement screening: the use of fundamental movements as an assessment of function - part 1. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014 May;9(3):396-409. — View Citation
Cook G, Burton L, Hoogenboom BJ, Voight M. Functional movement screening: the use of fundamental movements as an assessment of function-part 2. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Aug;9(4):549-63. — View Citation
Cook, G. (2003). Athletic Body in Balance. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Cook, G. (2010). Movement: Functional Movement Systems - Screening, Assessment and Corrective Strategies. Santa Cruz, CA: On Target Publications.
Duncan MJ, Stanley M, Leddington Wright S. The association between functional movement and overweight and obesity in British primary school children. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2013 May 15;5:11. doi: 10.1186/2052-1847-5-11. — View Citation
Duncan MJ, Stanley M. Functional movement is negatively associated with weight status and positively associated with physical activity in british primary school children. J Obes. 2012;2012:697563. doi: 10.1155/2012/697563. — View Citation
Gribble PA, Hertel J, Plisky P. Using the Star Excursion Balance Test to assess dynamic postural-control deficits and outcomes in lower extremity injury: a literature and systematic review. J Athl Train. 2012 May-Jun;47(3):339-57. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-47.3.08. Review. — View Citation
Harman, E., & Garhammer, J. (2008). Administration, scoring, and interpretation of selected tests. In T.R. Baechle, & R.W. Earle (Eds.), Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning (3rd ed., pp. 250-292). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Hirth, C.J. (2007). Clinical movement analysis to identify muscle imbalances and guide exercise. Athletic Therapy Today, 12(4), 10-14.
International Association of Fire Fighters. (2008). The Fire Service Joint Labor Management Wellness-Fitness Initiative, (3rd ed.). Washington, D.C.
Kiesel, K, Burton, L., & Cook, G. (2004). Mobility screening for the core. Athletic Therapy Today, 9(5), 38-41.
Knapik JJ, Cosio-Lima LM, Reynolds KL, Shumway RS. Efficacy of functional movement screening for predicting injuries in coast guard cadets. J Strength Cond Res. 2015 May;29(5):1157-62. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000704. — View Citation
Kritz, M., Cronin, J., & Hume, P. (2009). The bodyweight squat: A movement screen for the squat pattern. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 31(1), 76-85.
Kritz, M., Cronin, J., & Hume, P. (2009). Using the body weight forward lunge to screen an athlete's lunge pattern. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 31(6), 15-24.
Kurlick G.M. (2012). Stop, drop, and roll: workplace hazards of local government firefighters, 2009. Monthly Labor Review, 135, 18-25.
Page, P., Frank, C.C., & Lardner, R. (2010). Assessment and Treatment of Muscle Imbalance: The Janda Approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Peate WF, Bates G, Lunda K, Francis S, Bellamy K. Core strength: a new model for injury prediction and prevention. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2007 Apr 11;2:3. — View Citation
Perry FT, Koehle MS. Normative data for the functional movement screen in middle-aged adults. J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Feb;27(2):458-62. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182576fa6. — View Citation
Reiman, M.P., & Manske, R.C. (2009). Functional Testing in Human Performance. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Seabury, S.A., & McLaren, C.F. (2010). Frequency, Severity, and Economic Consequences of Musculoskeletal Injuries to Firefighters in California. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Center for Health and Safety in the Workplace.
TriData Corporation (2005). The Economic Consequences of Firefighter Injuries and their Prevention. Final Report. Arlington, VA: National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce.
* Note: There are 26 references in all — Click here to view all references
| Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Change in Total Functional Movement Screen (FMS) Score | The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is a seven task movement screen test that will be scored on a 4-point scale (0-3, worst-best), for a total of 21 possible points. | Pre-Intervention (Week 0), Mid-Intervention (Week 3), Post-Intervention (Week 5) | No |
| Primary | Change in Overall Movement Efficiency (ME) Test Score | The Movement Efficiency (ME) Test, which is part of the Fusionetics Human Performance System, uses a 0-100 scale to score the functional movement quality of an individual. | Pre-Intervention (Week 0), Mid-Intervention (Week 3), Post-Intervention (Week 5) | No |
| Primary | Change in Dynamic Balance Ability | The dynamic balance ability of each participant will be assessed by utilizing the Y-Balance Test (YBT). | Pre-Intervention (Week 0), Mid-Intervention (Week 3), Post-Intervention (Week 5) | No |
| Secondary | Change in Range of Motion | Passive range of Motion (PROM) for the foot, ankle, knee, hip, shoulder, and trunk will be bilaterally measured with a standard plastic goniometer (a kind of ruler). | Pre-Intervention (Week 0), Mid-Intervention (Week 3), Post-Intervention (Week 5) | No |
| Secondary | Change in Total Body Power Output | Total body power output will be examined by performing a countermovement jump (CMJ), which is a field-test commonly utilized by practitioners to examine total body power output. | Pre-Intervention (Week 0), Mid-Intervention (Week 3), Post-Intervention (Week 5) | No |
| Secondary | Change in Lower Extremity Isometric Muscular Strength | The isometric lower extremity muscular strength of each participant will be examined utilizing the Jackson Strength Evaluation System. | Pre-Intervention (Week 0), Mid-Intervention (Week 3), Post-Intervention (Week 5) | No |
| Secondary | Change in Core Muscular Endurance | The overall core muscular endurance of each participant will be examined through the use of a prone plank. Participants will perform a prone plank until volitional fatigue. | Pre-Intervention (Week 0), Mid-Intervention (Week 3), Post-Intervention (Week 5) | No |
| Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Completed |
NCT06142110 -
The Relationship Between Functional Movement and Respiratory Muscle Strength
|
N/A |