On appraisal , the MCS , M4-MS , and SIMS seem to provide the most practical value for assessing movement quality as they provide the strongest reports of developmental rigor and an identifiable evidence base .
In addition , considering the evidence provided , these tools may have the strongest potential for identifying performance capabilities and guiding exercise prescription in athletic and sport-specific population
Abstract Bennett , H , Davison , K , Arnold , J , Slattery , F , Martin , M , and Norton , K. Multicomponent musculoskeletal movement assessment tools : a systematic review and critical appraisal of their development and applicability to professional practice .
J Strength Cond Res 31(10 ) : 2903–2919 , 2017—Multicomponent movement assessment tools have become commonplace to measure movement quality , proposing to indicate injury risk and performance capabilities .
Despite popular use , there has been no attempt to compare the components of each tool reported in the literature , the processes in which they were developed , or the underpinning rationale for their included content .
As such , the objective of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive summary of current movement assessment tools and appraise the evidence supporting their development .
Reliability and validity of observational risk screening in evaluating dynamic knee valgus.
STUDY DESIGN Nonexperimental method ological study . OBJECTIVES To determine the interrater and intrarater reliability and validity of using observational risk-screening guidelines to evaluate dynamic knee valgus . BACKGROUND A deficiency in the neuromuscular control of the hip has been identified as a key risk factor for noncontact anterior cruciate ligament ( ACL ) injury in postpubescent females . This deficiency can manifest itself as a valgus knee alignment during tasks involving hip and knee flexion . There are currently no scientifically tested methods to screen for dynamic knee valgus in the clinic or on the field . METHODS Three physiotherapists used  observational risk-screening guidelines  to rate 40 adolescent female soccer players according to their risk of ACL injury . The rating was based on the amount of dynamic knee valgus observed on a drop-jump l and ing . Ratings were evaluated for intrarater and interrater agreement using kappa coefficients . Sensitivity and specificity of ratings were evaluated by comparing observational ratings , with measurements obtained using 3-dimensional ( 3-D ) motion analysis . RESULTS Kappa coefficients for intrarater and interrater agreement ranged from 0.75 to 0.85 , indicating that ratings were reasonably consistent over time and between physiotherapists . Sensitivity values were inadequate , ranging from 67 % to 87 % . This indicated that raters failed to detect up to a third of " truly high-risk " individuals . Specificity values ranged from 60 % to 72 % , which was considered adequate for the purpose s of the screening . CONCLUSION Observational risk screening is a practical and cost-effective method of screening for ACL injury risk . Rater agreement and specificity were acceptable for this method , but sensitivity was not . To detect a greater proportion of individuals at risk of ACL injury , coaches and clinicians should ensure that they include additional tests for other high-risk characteristics in their screening protocol
On appraisal , the MCS , M4-MS , and SIMS seem to provide the most practical value for assessing movement quality as they provide the strongest reports of developmental rigor and an identifiable evidence base .
In addition , considering the evidence provided , these tools may have the strongest potential for identifying performance capabilities and guiding exercise prescription in athletic and sport-specific population
Abstract Bennett , H , Davison , K , Arnold , J , Slattery , F , Martin , M , and Norton , K. Multicomponent musculoskeletal movement assessment tools : a systematic review and critical appraisal of their development and applicability to professional practice .
J Strength Cond Res 31(10 ) : 2903–2919 , 2017—Multicomponent movement assessment tools have become commonplace to measure movement quality , proposing to indicate injury risk and performance capabilities .
Despite popular use , there has been no attempt to compare the components of each tool reported in the literature , the processes in which they were developed , or the underpinning rationale for their included content .
As such , the objective of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive summary of current movement assessment tools and appraise the evidence supporting their development .