Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Boava, André Luis Couto [UNESP]
Data de Publicação: 2018
Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/11449/203609
http://www.athena.biblioteca.unesp.br/exlibris/bd/capelo/2019-05-29/000916059.pdf
Resumo: Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is a routine assessment composed of seven movements that could report limitations or asymmetries in stability and mobility by evaluating injury incidence, detecting muscular imbalance and movement dysfunction. Thus, the aim of this study was to analyze the effects of different physical activities on dynamic and equilibrium capacities through an FMS test. The test was applied in three groups; Crossfit (CF), Weightlifting (W) and Sedentary (S), with 15 volunteers each. For a comparison between the groups, a one-way ANOVA was used with post-hoc Bonferroni considering the level of significance of p <0.05. The Sedentary group showed a lower score in FMS (13,3 ± 2,77), the weight lifters and the Crossfit group showed a higher score (16,6±1,4 and 19±1,64, respectively), considering 14 or less an indicative of injury score (10,22). Therefore, there was a significant difference between the Sedentary group and the other groups (P<0,01). In a partial assessment of functional movements, notorious differences were observed in the three groups: CF, W and S for Deep Squat, with p<0,01, In-line Lunge (p=0,03), Hurdle step (p=0,03), Trunk Stability Push-Up (p=0,001) and Rotary Stability (p=0,02). There was some difference between CF and S groups; only Active Straight Leg Raise and Shoulder Mobility did not show significant differences. Thus, those individuals who do not perform physical activities showed a lower score in FMS, exhibiting an increased risk of injuries. The study did not show bigger differences between the CF and W groups, in the total score of FMS there was no significant difference and in a partial evaluation only Deep Squat showed difference. Therefore, through an analysis of an FMS test, we can conclude that Crossfit training does not necessarily result in better movement patterns, stability and join mobility when compared to weight lifters
id UNSP_747c956ff9d2b809274e9f9bedfd0c0e
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/203609
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidadesFunctional Movement Screen (FMS®): analysis of dynamic capacities in different modalitiesCapacidade motoraCapacidade motora - TestesExercícios físicosFerimentos e lesõesFunctional Movement Screen (FMS) is a routine assessment composed of seven movements that could report limitations or asymmetries in stability and mobility by evaluating injury incidence, detecting muscular imbalance and movement dysfunction. Thus, the aim of this study was to analyze the effects of different physical activities on dynamic and equilibrium capacities through an FMS test. The test was applied in three groups; Crossfit (CF), Weightlifting (W) and Sedentary (S), with 15 volunteers each. For a comparison between the groups, a one-way ANOVA was used with post-hoc Bonferroni considering the level of significance of p <0.05. The Sedentary group showed a lower score in FMS (13,3 ± 2,77), the weight lifters and the Crossfit group showed a higher score (16,6±1,4 and 19±1,64, respectively), considering 14 or less an indicative of injury score (10,22). Therefore, there was a significant difference between the Sedentary group and the other groups (P<0,01). In a partial assessment of functional movements, notorious differences were observed in the three groups: CF, W and S for Deep Squat, with p<0,01, In-line Lunge (p=0,03), Hurdle step (p=0,03), Trunk Stability Push-Up (p=0,001) and Rotary Stability (p=0,02). There was some difference between CF and S groups; only Active Straight Leg Raise and Shoulder Mobility did not show significant differences. Thus, those individuals who do not perform physical activities showed a lower score in FMS, exhibiting an increased risk of injuries. The study did not show bigger differences between the CF and W groups, in the total score of FMS there was no significant difference and in a partial evaluation only Deep Squat showed difference. Therefore, through an analysis of an FMS test, we can conclude that Crossfit training does not necessarily result in better movement patterns, stability and join mobility when compared to weight liftersO presente estudo teve como objetivo analisar o efeito de diferentes atividades físicas nas capacidades dinâmicas e de equilíbrio por meio do teste de FMS®, que é composto por sete movimentos podendo identificar limitações ou assimetrias na estabilidade e mobilidade de cada indivíduo, avaliando o risco de lesões e previsibilidade de desempenho. O teste foi aplicado em três grupos, Crossfit (CF), Musculação (M) e Sedentários (S) com 15 participantes cada. Para uma comparação entre os grupos foi utilizada uma ANOVA oneway, com post-hoc de Bonferroni sendo adotado o nível de significância de p<0,05. O score total do FMS® apresentou pontuação média no grupo Sedentário de 13,3±2,77, no grupo Musculação de 16,6±1,4 e no grupo Crossfit de 19±1,64, considerando 14 ou menos uma pontuação indicativa de lesões (KIESEL et al. 2007; VECCHIO; GONDIM; ARRUDA, 2016). Houve diferença significativa do grupo Sedentário em relação aos outros grupos (P<0,01). Em uma análise fragmentada dos movimentos obtivemos diferença significativa entre CF, M e S no item agachamento profundo, com p<0,01, nos itens avanço em linha (p=0,03), passo com barreira (p=0,03), flexão (p=0,001) e estabilização rotacional (p=0,02), observamos diferença apenas entre os grupos CF e S. Portanto aqueles indivíduos que não realizam atividade física apresentaram um pior desempenho no FMS®, elevando os riscos de lesões. Não observamos diferenças entre o grupo CF e M na análise do score total não houve diferença significativa já na análise fragmentada apenas no item agachamento profundo. Sendo assim, por meio de uma análise do FMS®, podemos concluir que o Crossfit, não necessariamente, resulta em melhores padrões de movimentos, estabilidade e mobilidade articular quando comparado à MusculaçãoUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Gonçalves, Mauro [UNESP]Eltz, Giovana Duarte [UNESP]Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Boava, André Luis Couto [UNESP]2021-03-10T12:57:44Z2021-03-10T12:57:44Z2018info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis16 f.application/pdfBOAVA, André Luis Couto. Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades. 2018. 16 f. Trabalho de conclusão de curso (bacharelado - Educação Física) - Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Instituto de Biociências (Campus de Rio Claro), 2018.http://hdl.handle.net/11449/203609990009160590206341http://www.athena.biblioteca.unesp.br/exlibris/bd/capelo/2019-05-29/000916059.pdfAlmareponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPporinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-07-10T13:43:34Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/203609Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T17:28:02.470504Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades
Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): analysis of dynamic capacities in different modalities
title Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades
spellingShingle Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades
Boava, André Luis Couto [UNESP]
Capacidade motora
Capacidade motora - Testes
Exercícios físicos
Ferimentos e lesões
title_short Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades
title_full Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades
title_fullStr Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades
title_full_unstemmed Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades
title_sort Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades
author Boava, André Luis Couto [UNESP]
author_facet Boava, André Luis Couto [UNESP]
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Gonçalves, Mauro [UNESP]
Eltz, Giovana Duarte [UNESP]
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Boava, André Luis Couto [UNESP]
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Capacidade motora
Capacidade motora - Testes
Exercícios físicos
Ferimentos e lesões
topic Capacidade motora
Capacidade motora - Testes
Exercícios físicos
Ferimentos e lesões
description Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is a routine assessment composed of seven movements that could report limitations or asymmetries in stability and mobility by evaluating injury incidence, detecting muscular imbalance and movement dysfunction. Thus, the aim of this study was to analyze the effects of different physical activities on dynamic and equilibrium capacities through an FMS test. The test was applied in three groups; Crossfit (CF), Weightlifting (W) and Sedentary (S), with 15 volunteers each. For a comparison between the groups, a one-way ANOVA was used with post-hoc Bonferroni considering the level of significance of p <0.05. The Sedentary group showed a lower score in FMS (13,3 ± 2,77), the weight lifters and the Crossfit group showed a higher score (16,6±1,4 and 19±1,64, respectively), considering 14 or less an indicative of injury score (10,22). Therefore, there was a significant difference between the Sedentary group and the other groups (P<0,01). In a partial assessment of functional movements, notorious differences were observed in the three groups: CF, W and S for Deep Squat, with p<0,01, In-line Lunge (p=0,03), Hurdle step (p=0,03), Trunk Stability Push-Up (p=0,001) and Rotary Stability (p=0,02). There was some difference between CF and S groups; only Active Straight Leg Raise and Shoulder Mobility did not show significant differences. Thus, those individuals who do not perform physical activities showed a lower score in FMS, exhibiting an increased risk of injuries. The study did not show bigger differences between the CF and W groups, in the total score of FMS there was no significant difference and in a partial evaluation only Deep Squat showed difference. Therefore, through an analysis of an FMS test, we can conclude that Crossfit training does not necessarily result in better movement patterns, stability and join mobility when compared to weight lifters
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018
2021-03-10T12:57:44Z
2021-03-10T12:57:44Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis
format bachelorThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv BOAVA, André Luis Couto. Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades. 2018. 16 f. Trabalho de conclusão de curso (bacharelado - Educação Física) - Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Instituto de Biociências (Campus de Rio Claro), 2018.
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/203609
990009160590206341
http://www.athena.biblioteca.unesp.br/exlibris/bd/capelo/2019-05-29/000916059.pdf
identifier_str_mv BOAVA, André Luis Couto. Functional Movement Screen (FMS®): análise das capacidades dinâmicas em praticantes de diferentes modalidades. 2018. 16 f. Trabalho de conclusão de curso (bacharelado - Educação Física) - Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Instituto de Biociências (Campus de Rio Claro), 2018.
990009160590206341
url http://hdl.handle.net/11449/203609
http://www.athena.biblioteca.unesp.br/exlibris/bd/capelo/2019-05-29/000916059.pdf
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 16 f.
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Alma
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1808128815343337472