Evaluating Corrective Strategies and Researching Asymmetry and Injury Prediction
Written by Brandon Wednesday, September 18, 2013 FMS Research
Outline of Dr. Butler’s (Duke University) Interview
with Joe Heiler (SportsRehabExpert.com) Part 2
III. How do you know if corrective strategies are working? (Not overloading the system)
A. Learning effect due to neuromuscular adaptation
B. Important to set a standard to evaluate progress
1. Other variables may come into play when evaluating
2. Why is someone not progressing?
C. Advances in real-time monitoring may benefit creating of optimal training strategies
D. Want to understand impact of other variables such as heart-rate
1. Likely there are functional windows/ranges
2. Combine physiologic readiness to retraining strategies
IV. Asymmetry and Injury Prediction
A. Are certain asymmetries acceptable and others not?
B. One study with NFL players suggests ANY asymmetry leads to elevated injury risk
C. Research supports that ROM/Strength imbalances lead to increased injury risk
D. Don’t assume that an asymmetrical job = asymmetry on basic functional tasks
E. (1,2) (1,3) scores beyond the physiologic norm
F. Baseball Example:
1. 5° difference in total arc of motion side to side, elevated injury risk (beyond the scope of the FMS)
2. Perform additional shoulder rotation ROM test with double inclinometer method
G. Goal is to correct in the direction of symmetry in a big physiologic window not with the idea of being perfect; however, understanding it may not happen due to load.