For many years clinicians in several different arenas have attempted to assess and train human movement. The overarching premise of these tasks is directly linked to gaining knowledge about functional movement pathologies or what I like to call “Bio-MIS-chanics” within the body’s motor control system. Why is there such a concern to investigate human movement? The simple response is that there appears to be several factors regarding human movement and performance. The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) System and different movement screen techniques have been implemented over the years to get a better grasp on movement and performance outcomes in industrial and tactile occupations, such as firefighters, police, and military. As a deduction system of movement faults or limitations the FMS’s popularity has made it the “mammogram of movement” or for the males a “pRostulate of performance”.  All kidding aside, in review of the literature the FMS seems to be a well-established assessment system that has been moderately effective in determining injury risk potentials and appears to have some connections to tactile occupational performance variables, such as dropout rates and leave of absence. Furthermore, the simplicity of implementing the testing and the corrective exercises makes it ideal for mass testing of groups while providing objective values that can be applicable to individual needs and isolated body segments (i.e. upper verse lower body). And while some limitations exist regarding the reliability for pre- to post-intervention data the system is easily adaptable to both the training and medical personnel and environments. However, is this truly a responsive tool that should be used to determine tactical occupation performance potentials?  

As a clinician that endorses the use of the FMS, the SFMA, the Y-balance system and the philosophy regarding functional movement pathologies I continue to evaluate where the specificity of such “standardized” movement assessments truly fit into practice. I must say that when I first was introduced to the techniques by Lee Burton in some hallway of a conference center nearly 15 years ago I was skeptical. Back then there were only 4 movements with a slightly different view on the objectivity of movement. And while the evolution and marketing of the FMS has changed to more of an infomercial approach the basic concepts of maintaining bilateral symmetry and foundation movements in order to further acquisition skill remain the same. Thus, over the years of having personally tested well over 2000+ athletes (youth, college, older adults, professional), military and service personnel I have been able to develop “my-go-to” movements. You know the ones that I place more weight on in my assessment. For example, the overhead squat and the prescribed corrective strategies have become one of the more explicit aspects of the screen that I rely on. While I continue to follow the FMS procedure fairly close this is one of many novelties that I have developed over the years. I realize that the FMS is only one part of a multifaceted assessment and intervention process; however, I continue to search for ways to improve its utility.  

Thus, I pose to you the reader; What are the pro’s and con’s you have identified with the FMS in your specific practice? Are there specific movements or corrective exercises that you recommend placing emphasis on and why?  Do you have suggestions for modifying the grading or implementation of the movements/corrective strategy? While I truly feel that the research is beginning to validate the use and responsiveness of the FMS and related screens for the tactile occupations, the nuances from you the practitioner is what will really help to identify the specify of this tool and related screens.  Please, share your thoughts.  

 Matt, despite much attention from researchers and trainers, managing the back pain problem is one of our biggest challenges. When you add a soldier’s kit and the rough terrain of most deployments, the challenges are even greater. I don’t pretend to have a solution, but here is what I feel are some best practices:

• If you have already had a problem, make sure you get full rehab. That means restoring motion, activation, 3-D motor control, strength, endurance, and confidence. Too often rehab stops when the pain is gone – not good enough.
• Endurance is probably more protective than strength. So, once adequate functional strength is achieved, emphasize endurance.
• Get off of the floor. Mat or floor based stability exercises are a fine place to start, but most challenging activities occur on your feet. Start with symmetrical loads and base of support, and then gradually start to challenge stability more with asymmetrical loads and stances.
• Make sure the hips and thoracic spine are mobile. The lumbar spine is not meant to move very much in the frontal and transverse planes, so functional movement in those planes needs to come from above and below the lumbar spine.
• Optimize aerobic and anaerobic fitness; when central fatigue sets in, it’s hard to control the spine. For soldiers that have to carry heavy loads over long distance, create a systematic progression that gradually increases one of those variables at a time.
• Educate on habitual postures. The low-load stress of bad habitual postures can catch up with us over time.

Hope this helps.

Good news Jason, the new TSAC-F Reference Guide has finally arrived!

http://www.humankinetics.com/products/all-products/NSCAs-Tactical-Strength-and-Conditioning-Facilitators-Reference-Guide-eBook

Mr Lyle and Mr Murphy,

A sincere thank you for your responses and no worries on the delay.  I dont think this topic is going away anytime soon!  From your responses, I gathered the following details:

1. Leadership MUST make it a priority in terms of training the trainers on improving human performance, physical testing and paying for the qualified resources (trainers).  Military components have these already (Unit PT Chief, etc.). 

2. Bring qualified people in to teach the necessary material.  You both listed a wealth of topics that should be taught.

3.  Reach out to the drilling members (those who train once per month) through online means and through their military leadership.

Obviously, you gave greater detail than that, but that seemed to be basic idea. 

I would like to touch on the topic of bringing qualified people in to the units.  The Army has a Master of Fitness Trainer course to train soldiers in the topics you discussed.  The idea is that that soldier can return to his unit and the units PT trainer.  At least, that is how I understand it.  I have been in the national guard for almost 9 years and never once have I heard of this course being a priority to any leadership.  I have also known of several soldiers with similar qualifications to mine, yet their expertise was rarely, if ever tapped into, unless that individual stepped forward. 

My question is, how did you go about selling your train-the-trainer plans to unit leadership?  From my point of view, I think the interest is there, BUT time and money are not, especially in the U.S. where we are in the middle of a draw down, budget cuts and the demand on the guard isnt expected to go away. 

What we are doing:

1.  Publishing a monthly Strength & Conditioning Newsletter for the soldiers.  The issues will first focus on passing the physical fitness test and will then move to warfighter specific training and other topics you both have mentioned.

2.  Initiating a research study exploring a take home program for drilling members.  Focus will again be on the fitness test, but we expect it may have application more broadly.  This is very early in the planning process though. 

Mr. Murphy, I would like to attend the TSAC conference, but I can't afford to go this year.  I fully plan to attend conferences in the future, as I am able. 

Thanks!

Matt

SSG Tentis,

I totally agree with you about strength being a huge discriminator in load carriage, especially, as you know, when the loads get heavier!  I have also witnessed that the stronger soldiers/lifters do better in the ruck than the good runners.  I think this is a very important point.  Thank you for this comment.  I think our readers will gain alot from this point and someone who has witnessed it first-hand. 

Feel free to use my post as a reference.  Not a problem at all.  If I can help in any other way; feel free to e-mail me.

paul.c.henning@us.army.mil

Dear TSAC SIG Members,

In an attempt to better serve you and enhance engagement on the forum, we have scheduled TSAC content experts to serve as moderators on the forum over the next 5 months. 1 expert will present and moderate a topic during each month. The topics are those that members have requested. The moderator for a given month will post a description of the topic by the first of the month and respond to any comments or questions at least once per week for the duration of that month. The schedule of topics and moderators is listed below. We hope you find this helpful. Please note that you may still post any unrelated comments or questions on the forum during this time.

March: Paul Henning, PhD, CSCS; Load Carriage for Tactical Operators

April: Danny McMillian, DSc-PT, CSCS; Injury Prevention for Tactical Operators

May: Thomas Palmer, PhD, ATC, CSCS; Using the FMS for Tactical Operators

June: Nancy Graber, PhD; Psychology for the Tactical Operator

July: Guy Leahy, MEd, HFS, CSCS*D; Fad Exercise Programs

With kind regards,

Mark Abel, PhD, CSCS*D, TSAC-F

Chair-TSAC SIG

hi Kevin

I just emailed you. let me know how I can help

Coach Hofman

To whom it may interest...

Recently within the last month or so I came across an article that was printed in the Marine Corps Times broaching the topic of employing Athletic Trainers and other fitness professionals specifically for combat units. Eighteen to be exact. Currently, as I understand it, there are ATs that are already utilized at Recruit/ Candidate training sites for every physical training evolution. I am not entirely sure if they are contracted through a company or if they are independent DOD civilian employees but my money would be on DOD civilians...

not sure if that helps at all....

-Drew