by Art Horne

Although identifying a poorly executed squat is easy for many sports medicine and strength professionals (especially given the “rules” and guidelines set forth by the FMS standards), identifying the actual underlying problem or major contributor to a deficit squat is never as easy.  However, with a systems based approach during your annual pre-participation screenings your team of health care and performance professionals can tease out these often overlooked deficiencies as part of your movement screen from the very beginning instead of reacting after future injury or poor performance.

As I mentioned in a prior post the ability to express a proper squat pattern is fundamental to human movement.  Included in this category of fundamental “expressions” is the overhead reach, or what is commonly known through the Selective Functional Movement Screen TM (SFMA) as the Multi-segmental Extension Pattern (MSE) pictured below (figure1).  This easy test that takes literally 10 seconds can produce some startling results when athletes and those observing them, witness an otherwise “healthy”  and  highly skilled athlete in the prime of their life unable to reach behind them while shifting their weight and hips forward. 

figure 1.

Let’s break it down.

According to the SFMATM rules, or simple human movement fundamentals, normal range of motion during this test includes:

1. With heels together (this is important and often overlooked as it provides a test-retest standardization) an athlete or patient should be able to have their ASIS pass over their great toes while;

2. Reaching overhead with hands in line with their shoulders and have the spine of their scapula clear or pass behind the heels of their feet and;

3. Their hands clear or pass behind the spine of the scapula (Figure 2).

figure 2.

These movement minimums allow clinicians and performance coaches a starting point to begin observing their athletes for general restrictions within this pattern.  If an athlete is unable to complete this movement (failure to pass the ASIS over the great toe) then the athlete is asked to cross their arms over their chest and repeat the movement.  If the athlete is unable to still exhibit this fundamental expression of extension then the athlete in my opinion should be referred to a staff athletic trainer for further evaluation with the underlying problem is identified and addressed.  Many times the athlete will not understand why they are being referred since they have never had a “problem” before, but after a quick evaluation and treatment you’ll often find their eyes beam wide open with the additional range and freedom of motion that you’ve given back to them.

To confirm your findings on the examination table (although authentic human movement rarely ever happens on an exam table. Side note: How come you can measure with a goniometer an athlete’s ankle, knee and hip range of motion on an examination table and determine that they have the requisite mobility to perform a normal and unrestricted squat pattern but when you stand them up, the pattern looks like a train wreck? Movement means so much more than just your standard orthopedic examinations), have the athlete lay prone and ask them to tighten up one butt check and extend their leg off the table.  Repeat with the opposite leg and compare.  Rarely will an athlete be able to exhibit the appropriate amount of hip extension during this prone table test and not be able to pass their ASIS over their toes during the standing evaluation with arms crossed over head.

So what’s next? How do I fix it?

Not so fast.  I think it’s worth mentioning here a few items that support adding this simple test into both your yearly screenings along with your general orthopedic examination (regardless of injury presentation).  First off, I have been utilizing the FMSTM screen for a very long time as a strength coach, and over the last year have been utilizing the SFMATM methodology during injury presentation in the clinic and the overwhelming end result to many movement dysfunction and injury/pain cases have always boiled down to two movement impairments – Shoulder Mobility (Which in the end really is T-Spine Mobility) and Hip Extension.  The FMSTM  includes a test called the Active Straight Leg Raise, and this test unfortunately has been deemed a “hamstring” flexibility test or a hip flexion test by most casual observers but this couldn’t be further from the truth or the original intent of the test (future post coming: Are your hamstrings tight or are they just not letting you go somewhere you have no business being?).

For those that are not familiar with the test, an athlete lays on their back with a 2x6 board under their knees and while keeping the bottom leg in contact with the board slowly raises an extended leg upwards exhibiting the DIFFERENCE and available motion between the two legs and NOT the amount of hamstring or hip flexion range that you have.  It is this DIFFERENCE that should be noted, which ultimately leads to an examination and treatment focus of the down-leg in most instances as I mentioned earlier as the limiting factor (hip extension).

This should really come as no surprise since we have clearly become a hip flexion dominant society (sitting at computers, video games, etc not to mention our affinity for sitting on bikes at the commercial gym and watching the TV screen instead of sprinting on an incline treadmill which of course requires a bit of hard work and the aforementioned hip extension) and have basically lost the ability to “express” hip extension.  Although strength coaches and sports medicine professionals alike advocate “stretching” this problematic area after injury I think it’s worth teasing out your future patients sooner than later with a simple test while they are healthy athletes and avoid their inevitable future visit to your sports medicine clinic as patients.

Next week: Addressing and Correcting this Hip Extension Problem from both sides of the wall.

Join Mark R. Proctor, MD, director of the Brain Injury Center, as he leads a dynamic discussion on concussions in pediatric patients during a live, interactive Webcast. A multidisciplinary team, including members of Neurology, Neurosurgery, Neuropsychology, Neuroradiology and Sports Medicine, will discuss the signs of mild and severe concussions, on-field symptom management, the psychological toll of concussions, and best practices for treatment and follow-up.

This event will be streamed live on September 12th at 6:00pm. Click HERE for complete details.

by Art Horne

At the college level many times both assessment and intervention decisions are made based on time availability and simple manpower, and not on what the student-athlete requires for optimal health and performance.  Juggling study hall, practice, classes along with rehabilitation and performance training leaves little time for “additional” work for either the student-athlete or the staff professional in charge to provide additional auxiliary services in the form of corrective work, soft tissue manipulation or additional strength training.  With that said, this extra “work” is often neglected or pushed aside until either the student-athlete is no longer able to participate in practices or games due to an injury or becomes crippled due to some form of debilitating pain.  In either case, unfortunately the student-athlete has now become a student-athlete-patient within your facility and the little time you had to address her problem prior (which of course is why it wasn’t taken care of in the first place, or even looked at – ignorance is bliss after all) has now become a major investment and drain on your time and services. 

In order to avoid the initial trap that so many sports medicine and performance departments fall into each fall it is paramount that both departments (Sports Medicine and Strength Training) first reach an agreement to implement a comprehensive screening program TOGETHER to tease out dysfunction, evaluate for painful movement patterns and address these minor “tweaks” before they become major pains.

Where to start:

It’s hard to rank which movement pattern is more important over another as each of the “Big Three” (squat, lunge and step) are all integrated and hold value within the context of all sporting events and training.  However, the only pattern among the three that is universally tested among college athletes and Strength Coaches is the squat, and thus, at least with regards to an integrated approach takes precedent over the others if having to choose only one.  Administering the test takes under a minute and produces so much more than just a number via the traditional FMS scoring system.

1. There’s something powerful about having members of both your sports medicine and strength staffs stand beside each other while evaluating a student-athletes overhead squat pattern during a fall pre-participation examination.  Because the strength coaches typically tests each athlete’s squat either later the same day or the next, this “pre-screening” allows strength coaches to see the movement pattern in an authentic form, not to mention in a rare one-on-one format which is never the case in a collegiate weight room due to traditional low coach to student ratios. 

2. When an athlete scores a “1” which means they cannot achieve a proper squat, it’s always nice to see the strength coach cross the name off the list of kids to max test later that day.  If you cannot squat to at least a “2” in the FMS overhead squat test then you simply haven’t qualified to load the pattern and go balls to the wall during testing – PERIOD.  This will sometimes be an issue among sports medicine professionals and strength coaches if the athletic trainer simply tells the strength coach that the athlete shouldn’t squat; but this is never a problem when the strength coach sees for themselves the awful pattern that the student-athlete exhibits.  The strength staff must be involved in your yearly pre-participation screenings to ensure buy in from all those involved in the care and performance of the student-athletes.  Remember: squatting is not a weight room exercise, it’s an expression of health, and allowing a student-athlete to max test a pattern that they cannot perform with their own body weight is simply irresponsible – PERIOD.

3. So, with that said, what do you do with the kid that scores a “1” on the FMS overhead squat test? As we discussed prior, time is of the essence and thus the underlying deficiency needs to be “teased out” and an appropriate intervention applied.  Both the FMS and The Selective Functional Movement Screen (SFMA) allows the clinician and/or strength coach an easy algorithm to follow with suggestions for corrective  work once the underlying deficiency is discovered.  Often times it’s the usual mobility suspects – t-spine, hips and ankle but just as often, these mobility issues requires a skilled clinician’s assessment and intervention.  On the flip side, in the case of a neuromuscular-stability issue a Goblet squat progression can be implemented by a strength coach during a training time in place of the squat, to begin coaching them back towards their end goal of a “3” or at least a “2” prior to max testing. (more on Goblet squat progression in a future post)

4. For all those athletes that score a “0” during the test – which means they experience pain, a comprehensive follow up evaluation is scheduled either later that day or within the week by a skilled clinician, (most likely a member of your Sports Medicine Staff) to determine the pain generator along with a rehabilitation plan to properly address.  So many times athletes will state that they have no pain on intake but then suddenly realize that during a simple movement that pain is actually present.  I’ve never had an athlete experience pain during a simple movement test (“It’s not a big deal, I just put ice on it after I train”) not miss time during preseason due to this pain or another greater underlying problem.

Now, some would say that when evaluating the overhead squat pattern utilizing the FMS scoring criteria that we basically all fall in as a “2” and that only a very few athletes score a “1” or a “3” and therefore  the test may be a waste of time.  Although it is true that the majority of athletes that I’ve evaluated using this methodology score a “2”, the means certainly justify the end, especially when you’ve i. discovered pain in this simple pattern and were able to treat it immediately and ii. Discovered a poor movement pattern and provided corrections which over time allowed the athlete to squat normally (which always makes the strength guys happy) but most importantly allows the athlete to achieve success in their individual sport – the reason they showed up in August for pre-season in the first place.  In the end, the OH squat test really only takes a minute but the effects of this evaluation and correction last throughout their college career.

Next week we will talk about evaluating the Multi-segmental Extension Pattern and what to do when you find a problem.

Speaker at this past summer's, "Standing On The Shoulders Of Giants" Seminar, Clare Frank continues to educate the nations top sports medicine and rehabilitation clinicians in her upcoming 2012 speaking engagements.

See Clare's 2012 Speaking dates below.

Asuza - 2012 DNS Course

Janda Approach - Arcadia 2012

by Art Horne

Over the past several years I have made the integration of Sports Medicine care and Strength Training a core principle within our department.  This is relatively a new concept as strength coaches and sports medicine professionals have often been pitted against each other by sport coaches, athletes and often themselves.  Although this new path to better health and performance is clearly thwart with challenges, there are some simple steps that both departments can make that immediately impacts BOTH the health and performance of the student-athlete and leaves both professionals looking better in the eyes of all those around them.  Below is a question from a colleague that I wanted to share publicly.  In order to answer his question, as well as many others, it is my intention over the next few months to describe and share with you the many small steps that any college or university can implement in order to provide an improved care and performance model.

Question:

I would like to start out by saying that I really enjoy watching the videos and articles that you have released in reference to the approach you use at Northeastern University to bridge the gap between strength and conditioning and sports medicine. I am a strength and conditioning coach for a small Div. I college and also have a background in athletic training. I wanted to see if you could provide more insight as to how you take the results from the screening and testing that you do and then implement them into your programming. We screen our athletes, which consist of the FMS and a couple more orthopedic screens that we feel are applicable to the particular sport (Modified Thomas Test, Bridge w/ Leg Extension, Reach/Roll/Lift, etc….). How would you then use the results in the development of your program? Do you give each athlete individual work or do you use a systematic team approach addressing common faults or dysfunctions? I am torn as to what to do because as I am sure you are familiar with, time I have to spend with athletes is limited and getting them to comply with performing certain exercises on their own time can be very difficult at times. Any advice or examples that you could provide would be very beneficial. Thanks in advance for your time.

The Language Barrier:

The first step in any “relationship” is being able to understand what the other person is saying, and there is no greater communication gap in existence than the one that currently exists between Sport Medicine and Strength Training professionals.  In order to discuss dysfunctional movement patterns, corrective exercises, rehabilitation goals or substitutions/alternatives for strength exercises both parties must share a common language and then demand continuity with these terms.

I remember many years ago speaking to one of our staff members about a particular athlete and suggesting that she speak to the strength staff about an alternative exercise for an athlete who was suffering from some low back pain.  When asked what I recommended I immediately suggested a more spine sparing approach to her current “core strengthening” exercises and that we recommend McGill’s “Birddog” exercise which has been proven to be safer on the spine than the flexion based crunches the athlete was accustomed to in the weight room.  Not knowing what a “Birddog” exercise was, I quickly demonstrated the exercise to my co-worker at which time she smiled and said that she was familiar with the exercise but learned it as a kneeling opposite arm-leg reach.   Confused, (since McGill made the exercise famous as part of his “Big Three”) I asked another staff member what the exercise was that I was performing to which he replied, “a quadruped contralateral reach.”  Now slightly irritated (but happy that the name at least described the movement), I bolted over to the strength room to inquire about their knowledge of Stuart McGill, his research and what they called this particular exercise.  To my surprise McGill’s work had never been heard of and that this particular exercise was programmed as a “Flying Superman” within the student-athletes performance training.  It became painfully clear that the first order of business was getting both staffs to speak the same language, both within each department and across them. 

Because most of the members on your staff (both Sports Medicine and Strength) have come from a variety of educational backgrounds, continuing education courses and levels of expertise, it is important to begin formulating a shared exercise and assessment language in order for civil conversations to first take place.  By investing only a small amount of time and addressing this often overlooked, yet integral first step your staff will begin to enjoy the following benefits:

1. Provide improved services to your student-athletes.  Imagine the previous example taking place and a student-athlete approaching you for help with their kneeling opposite arm-leg reaches.  Now, the name basically tells you exactly what is needed, but imagine you knowing the exercise as a different name and perhaps emphasizing a different teaching point altogether.  Would you teach the athlete how to do the exercise “your” way? Find the athletic trainer who wrote the rehabilitation program to help them out? Or tell them that you’re sorry but you don’t know what they should be doing?  In any case precious time is wasted and as a fellow athletic trainer, this is something none of us has enough of.  In addition, you can imagine the frustration of the student-athlete witnessing your staff stumble through the most basic exercise descriptions!

2. A shared language allows staff members to be interchangeable because now each staff member is calling the same exercise the same name and teaching it while emphasising the same teaching points.  This allows athletic trainers to jump in and help with all rehabilitation programs, and not just “their own teams” as well as provide continued care during an athletic trainer’s absence (sick day, vacation or travel with another team).

3. Continued care and coaching along the performance continuum.   Here’s where the magic happens: whether the athlete your provide care for is one week into their ACL rehabilitation or the starting point guard for the basketball team pushing 300 pounds in the squat rack, the exercises if named the same, taught the same and progressed the same all fall along the same care-performance continuum.    Let’s examine the above example to really understand the power of the shared language.  Imagine on the far left hand side the student-athlete one week post-op ACL reconstruction and on the far right side the starting point guard pushing serious weight and performing at the highest level.  Moving along the continuum from left to right the athlete will experience and undergo exercises such as: Quad Sets, Straight leg Raises, Clams, Glute-Bridges, Mini-Band walks, Wall Squats, Body weight squats, Lunges, Box Jumps, and the list goes on.  At some time this athlete will be in the weight room and not be able to perform the Olympic lift for example programmed for the team that day but can certainly do pull-ups, side bridges and a number of other exercises that the strength coach has put in place during any particular phase or block of training.  If a shared language exists, the athletic trainer and the strength coach can have a civil and meaningful conversation about where the athlete is and discuss and implement substitutions for exercises that are not appropriate for them all while progressing the athlete safely along this care-performance line.  Not to mention, many of the rehabilitation exercises can be implemented safely within strength training program as substitutions for advanced exercises thus minimizing the athlete’s daily rehabilitation time and allowing the athletic trainer who is providing care for this athlete more time to focus on other athletes or say for example address soft tissue restrictions with the same athlete during “rehab” time which often requires a one-on-one time period, thus making their strength training time much more effective.

Now, some people may say that a couple of exercise names or switching names from time to time is really not a big deal.  Perhaps not.  If you only care for one team, perform all the rehabilitation by yourself and no other staff member helps you, then you can certainly come up with your own language.  But imagine for a moment a car factory where all the parts are all called different names, put on in different orders and actually assembled with various degrees of precision.  Would you ever buy a car from a factory like this?  The answer is a resounding no - so how can we expect our student-athletes to buy in to what we are saying if each staff member is saying something different?  By having an Exercise Pool to draw consistent language from, the number of benefits far outweigh any possible downside while also reducing the amount of confusion among your own staff and encouraging an atmosphere of shared help and patient responsibility. 

Next week: How a shared language during initial assessment can limit overall injury rate and increase performance immediately.

We asked what the Giants in Sports Medicine & Rehabilitation, Basketball and Hockey performance training have read or are currently reading and we brought their list to you.  

Click HERE to view our recommended library with an ongoing list from these speakers who presented at the BSMPG "Standing On The Shoulders Of Giants" 2011 summer seminar.

by: Keke Lyles, DPT, CSCS

Okay, so I can understand as a strength coach not learning about Biorheology, but getting my doctorate in physical therapy, I would have thought for sure this would have been learned somewhere along the way. So what is it? Biorheology is the study of the flow and deformation of biological materials.  As most athletic trainers or physical therapy students we had to take some form of physics. We all learned about Newton’s and Hooke’s laws and hopefully something about how air and water play a role within those laws. And more importantly we hopefully learned how it is connected to the human body. The human body is an engineering masterpiece, so of course we can learn a lot from physics and apply it to our assessments and daily treatments. But we can’t learn everything from Newton and Hooke.

The body is not merely air and water. It is made up of blood, plasma, interstitial fluid, synovial fluids, skin, tendons, muscles, vessels and etc. And these bodily materials do not behave the same as typical materials. So in order to become engineers of the body we need to read and learn more about Biorheology, so as care providers we can actually understand the demands placed on the tissues that we are working on, and how exactly they handle the stresses placed upon them. Start with reading the Journal of Biorheology. Consider understanding physiological processes at a molecular level when treating your next patient.

As your student-athletes return this fall I think it’s worth considering a concept that was introduced to me by my mother when I was a young boy.

When caring for plants or vegetables in your garden there is inherently an ongoing process from the time you plant the seed until the time of harvest.

Many outside people will only ever see the final fruits of your labor and not the countless man hours put forth prior to that final stage.  With any successful harvest, much effort has to be placed on the frontend including watering and fertilizing the plants, providing the plant with proper sunlight, protecting it from that first frost and other harsh weather and maybe most important - picking the weeds from around its base and providing it the opportunity to grow and develop.

In a similar scenario, in order to achieve elite athletic success, countless man hours must be put forth prior to actual competition to ensure that your athletes are able to grow and express their athletic ability when the lights come on. 

This of course means weeding the garden on a daily basis.

Many professionals who provide sports medicine care and strength training to collegiate athletes understand that water and fertilizer are of course necessary, but tending to the weeds is so often neglected, at least until it’s too late. 

When your athletes arrive this fall will you look at how they move – squat, toe touch, backwards bend – or will you wait until they have pain or injury to address their ankle dorsi-flexion, lumbar stability and psoas length and quality?

The challenge then is to find the time to take a look at your garden on a daily basis and provide the care and services that it so very much deserves.  In this case, and in the case of your garden at home, it is clear that you will only reap what you sew - and take care of.

Art Horne is the Director of Sports Performance at Northeastern University, Boston MA.  He can be reached at a.horne@neu.edu.

Do your actions steps match your goals?

Lots of people talk the talk, but few walk the walk.

If you want to achieve your goals you’re going to have to understand that there is no escalator or elevator taking you to where you want to go.

Goals require walking the walk, plenty of hard work, and sweat.

Now get out there and take that first step.

Art Horne is the Director of Sports Performance at Northeastern University, Boston MA.  He can be reached at a.horne@neu.edu.