Menu

HomeHow it worksContact UsContact Us

Functional movement screen scores and injury prevalence among collegiate basketball players: a cross-sectional analysis

Yi Cai, Xinyi Yang · BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation · 2026

Researchers tested 59 Chinese college basketball players with the seven-part Functional Movement Screen and asked about injuries over the past year, where 45.8% reported an injury. Injured players scored lower on the FMS (14.07 vs 15.44), those scoring 14 or below had about triple the odds of injury, and a cutoff of 15 or below worked best for this group, though overall accuracy was modest (AUC 0.65), with the deep squat and hurdle step being the most predictive individual tests.
Takeaway: Use the FMS as one part of a broader injury-risk screen rather than a standalone test, paying extra attention to deep squat and hurdle step quality.
Abstract (source)

Abstract

Background: The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is widely used to evaluate movement quality and injury risk in athletes, yet evidence regarding its applicability in non-Western collegiate basketball contexts remains limited. This study examined the association between FMS scores and 12-month injury prevalence among Chinese collegiate basketball players and determined a population-specific optimal cutoff.

Methods: Fifty-nine varsity basketball players (38 males, 21 females; mean age 20.7 ± 1.4 years) from three Chinese universities completed the seven-test FMS battery and a standardized retrospective injury questionnaire. Group comparisons, ROC curve analysis, and binary logistic regression were performed.

Results: The 12-month injury prevalence was 45.8% (27/59). The injured group obtained significantly lower FMS composite scores than the non-injured group (14.07 ± 2.41 vs. 15.44 ± 2.04; p = .022, d = 0.62). Athletes scoring ≤ 14 demonstrated approximately three times greater odds of injury (OR = 3.23, 95% CI: 1.08–9.71). ROC analysis yielded an AUC of 0.65, with the Youden Index identifying ≤ 15 as the optimal cutoff (sensitivity = 0.741, specificity = 0.531). The composite score remained independently associated with injury after adjustment for sex, BMI, and training years (OR = 0.76, p = .019), with deep squat and hurdle step emerging as the only individual items independently linked to injury.

Conclusions: The FMS composite score is significantly associated with injury prevalence in Chinese collegiate basketball players, with a population-specific cutoff of ≤ 15 offering improved sensitivity over the conventional ≤ 14 threshold. The FMS may serve as a useful screening component when combined with complementary assessment tools.

Primary studyOpen accessInjury Prevention & Rehab
Read the original