The relationship between lower limb FMS tests and frontal plane projection angles at the knee utilising 2D motion analysis in cyclists

Abstract

Cycling is a sport that has not been widely researched for lower limb frontal plane movement analysis in relation to injury risk in the anterior knee, nor has a method been developed where a functional movement screening (FMS) protocol can be said whether it has relevance in application to a cycling population or not. The reliability and validity of both the FMS and 2D motion analysis have been studied extensively in a variety of settings and disciplines, however they have not been studied together to identify any relationships within the frontal plane projection angles (FPPA) of the lower limb of a cyclist. As both the FMS protocol and 2D motion analysis are relatively easy to utilise and are both easily accessible to the majority of clinicians this study will investigate if there is any viable application for the two to merge to aid clinicians in identifying at-risk cycling populations for anterior knee injury. AIM: To identify if there is a relationship between FMS compound results and frontal plane knee movement of cyclists using 2D video analysis. DESIGN: Paired sample test of relationship PARTICIPANTS: 29 recreational cyclists (n=16 male, n=13 female) MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: Same day recordings of FMS tests and cycling protocol with a test of correlation between results per participant. INTERVENTIONS: Participants performed the overhead squat, hurdle step, inline lunge, active straight leg raise and rotary stability tests. They were then set up appropriately on the static bicycle and cycled continually throughout the duration of the testing, lasting approximately thirteen and fifteen minutes, whilst being continually recorded via 2D video recording. Once the participant reached an 11 on the Borg’s iv scale a two minute timer would begin, of which the first ten seconds were used for data analysis. This was repeated five times. RESULTS: A Spearmans’s correlation identified that there were no statistically significant correlations found between the FMS compound test results and the knee movement angle. CONCLUSIONS: No significant relationships were found between the FMS tests and frontal plane knee angles using 2D video analysis, in this cycling population. This concludes that whilst the FMS and 2D motion analysis for FPPA have been identified as possibly useful protocols in isolation to identify potential injury risk to some populations, they are not a suitable protocol for clinicians when combined in identifying cyclists with an increased risk of anterior knee pain. Further research should be sought with other easily accessible movement screening protocols with 2D motion analysis to help identify an appropriate method to aid clinicians in identifying at-risk persons for anterior knee injury within a cycling population.