Tuesday, September 2, 2008

What's been going on

Been a long time since I've updated, so to fill the world in on my happenings as of late and a few notes:

- School is in session; I am teaching a class this fall (actually 2, one is a strength training class) titled Fundamentals of Physical Conditioning. These students are going to get a HEAVY dose of training principles and practical application, plus probably a few "rants". I am 1 for 1 in the "rants" department as we have had only 1 class thus far. I'll keep you posted on my percentage as the semester roles along.

- Attended Z-Health I-Phase (which is level 2) this month. Great information. The thing that I am continually impressed with, is Dr. Eric Cobb's ability to take a bunch on complex concepts and tie them together into a system grounded on solid principles. While attending Z-Health, I stayed at Dr. Mike T. Nelson's Canapé Inn, where we once again solved the world's problems. Now to just find a way to get the message out...

- Football is in the air, gotta love it!

- From a discussion with Dr. Nelson: "Failure is feedback with an emotional attachment" or something like that. Either way, learn from it.

- Excess tension inhibits performance. Tension is psychosomatic. Tension is activity in the body and mind. How can we effectively learn and improve other activities when we are already doing another activity (excess tension).

- "Adaptation doesn't have an off switch." -Frankie Faires



Mike T Nelson said...

Thanks buddy! You can stay anytime and it was great to solve all the worlds problems! Ha!

Excellent discussions and fun to watch the Olympics too.

If all goes as planned, 1-1.5 more years before the the official "Dr" title (although it does have a nice ring to it--heheheh).

I am excited to hear about the crazy stuff you will be doing up there!

Rock on!
Mike N

Aaron Schwenzfeier said...

Hell, they should just give you the title now.

Yeah it was a great time. I left with a headache though... thanks for overloading my brain.


"Failure is feedback with an emotional attachment."

...is brilliant.

You been holding out on me Mike!

Mike T Nelson said...

thanks guys
Mike N

Anonymous said...


Been awhile since I posted here. I am a believer in the FMS, but I thought you might find this interesting.

From http://www.biomech.com/current_full_article/?ArticleID=157

Test predicts injury in NFL players, but not in others
The seven exercise tests identify abnormal movement patterns and asymmetries.
By Jordana Bieze Foster

In sports medicine research, what works for one group of athletes may not necessarily be as effective for less-skilled athletes or those in a different sport. Two recent studies illustrate that the use of a Functional Movement Screen test to predict injury is no exception.In a study of 81 National Football League players, researchers from Evans­ville, IN, found that those who scored 14 or lower on the 21-point test were 11 times more likely to suffer a time-loss injury over the course of the preseason than those who scored 15 or higher. Players with an asymmetry were three times more likely to become injured. The presence of one of the two risk factors was associated with an 80% sensitivity, and having both risk factors was associated with a 98% specificity.

But researchers from Kansas City, MO, found that the same cutoff score of 14 predicted only one of 12 overuse injuries during a four-month period among 60 runners training for the 2006 Indianapolis Mini-Marathon. This translates to a sensitivity of just 8.3% despite a specificity of 94.5%. FMS score was not a significant predictor of injury, based on either linear or logistic regression statistical analysis, even with the significance set at P < 0.10, according to Don Hoover, PT, PhD, an assistant professor of physical therapy at Rockhurst Uni­versity in Kansas City. Both studies were presented in June at the annual meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine.

The FMS is a series of seven exercise tests designed to identify abnormal movement patterns and asymmetries. The test is part of a system, developed by Gray Cook, MSPT, and Lee Burton, PhD, ATC, in which a tailored exercise program is prescribed for each athlete to correct deficits identified during screening. This philosophy is not unlike that of classification-based back pain management (see “Classification schemes take narrower approach to low back pain,” July 2007, page 49).

Although Hoover theorized that perhaps four months was not long enough to see significant results in the recreational runners, he said the disappointing results in the running study echoed his earlier attempts to use the FMS test in professional male and female basketball players.

But the fact that the findings in professional football players don’t extend to oth­er populations did did not surprise the Evansville researchers. Kyle Kiesel, PT, PhD, an assistant professor of physical therapy at the University of Evansville, and his colleagues have found, for example, that the FMS test does not predict injury in high school football players to the same extent that it does in professional players.

“In high school kids, it just doesn’t pan out,” Kiesel said. “It may be that in professional athletes there’s no room to compensate, so any little asymmetry may be sig­nificant. In high school, that same asymmetry may impact the athlete’s performance but may not show up as an injury.”

The benefits of screening at the professional level, however, have now been de­monstrated in two Evansville studies, the first published in August 2007 in the North American Journal of Sports Physical Therapy. In that 46-player study, athletes who scored 14 or less on a preseason FMS test were 11.67 times more likely to end up on injured reserve for at least three weeks at some point during the season. Sensitivity of the 14-point cutoff score was 54% and specificity was 91%.

Occupational health researchers also have found links between FMS score and injury, although not prospectively. In an April 2007 study published in the Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, researchers from the University of Arizona found that firefighters with a history of injury had an FMS score that was on average 3.44 points lower than those with no history. Although, theoretically, the effects of an injury could have impaired a firefighter’s ability to perform the test, the researchers noted that all firefighters had completed a rigorous physical exam in which any limitations would have been documented.

This suggests that any underlying functional movement impairment in those with lower scores did not prevent them from meeting the often strenuous demands of their jobs.

—Jordana Bieze Foster

Ryan Hagenbuch

Aaron Schwenzfeier said...

Thanks for the info Ryan.

Specificity principle.

The FMS can be a good start for looking at movement, but there is just so much that I think it misses.

Things completely change when speed, reaction, and high levels of coordination become involved.