Movement Competency Screen: Rethinking the Rating
# Background Dancers are at high risk of musculoskeletal disorders. There has been a growing interest in the last few years in pre-season screening using tools to evaluate movement competency, among which is the Movement Competency Screen (MCS). It is currently scored using a categorical 3-level ra...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
North American Sports Medicine Institute
2022-12-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy |
| Online Access: | https://ijspt.scholasticahq.com/article/55531-movement-competency-screen-rethinking-the-rating |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | # Background
Dancers are at high risk of musculoskeletal disorders. There has been a growing interest in the last few years in pre-season screening using tools to evaluate movement competency, among which is the Movement Competency Screen (MCS). It is currently scored using a categorical 3-level rating system, but this method does not seem to take into account the load level of movements. A 5-level scoring system could potentially alleviate this problem.
# Hypothesis/Purpose
For each scoring system, to investigate (1) the internal consistency, and (2) the association with transversus abdominis activation (TrA), hip muscle strength and with Functional Movement screen (FMS^TM^) total score.
# Study design
Secondary analyses of a prospective cohort study.
# Methods
One hundred and eighteen professional and preprofessional dancers evolving in ballet or contemporary dance were recruited. The MCS was performed and was scored according to the 3- and 5-level scoring systems. The key variables for movement competency that were considered for convergent validity were the activation ratio of the TrA evaluated with ultrasound imaging and hip strength assessed with a handheld dynamometer. Movement competency was also measured with the FMS^TM^.
# Results
Internal consistency was higher for the 5-level scoring of the MCS items ($\alpha$=0.548) compared to the 3-level scoring system ($\alpha$=0.494). Multiple linear regressions showed that TrA activation, hip adductor strength, and FMS^TM^ could significantly explain 24.0% of the variance for the 5-level scoring system of the MCS whereas hip internal rotator strength and FMS^TM^ could explain only 16.4% of the variance for the 3-level scoring system.
# Conclusion
The 5-level scoring system showed better metrologic properties in terms of internal consistency and concurrent validity and therefore, should be preferred over the 3-level scoring system in future research.
# Level of Evidence
Level III |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2159-2896 |