

10 However, the validity of this technology in more complex functional movements is currently unclear.

Recent advances and improved access to markerless motion capture technology have made the use of low-cost motion analysis tools a possibility in the clinical setting.

Additionally, these somewhat artificial laboratory conditions can cause unknown experimental artefacts. Accordingly, these approaches are rarely employed in settings where time and/or financial constraints exist such as preseason screening of athletes performing functional movement. These approaches, however, require expensive equipment, significant operator training and analysis time as well as increased subject set-up time. Marker-based motion capture is currently considered the reference method for kinematic analyses. 7 Additionally, a modification of the CMJ with the athlete landing on one leg instead of two (Modified Counter Movement Jump (MCMJ)) has been recommended as being more sport-specific. In the context of football (soccer), commonly performed functional tests include: Single Leg Squat (SLS) assessing motion in frontal plane knee motion 2–4 Single Leg Jump (SLJ) 5 6 and Counter-movement Jump (CMJ) for lower limb power estimation.

Such approaches have shown limited accuracy in estimating injury likelihood, and it has been suggested that this could be attributed, in part, to the reduced objectivity of these approaches in comparison to 3-dimensional kinematic analyses. The quantification of these movement assessment tests is typically performed with simple visual analysis and rating, 1 or occasionally using video recording and later 2-dimensional analysis. Depending on the particular sport’s performance requirements and injury patterns, different test batteries are employed in an effort to identify at-risk individuals to target for tailored interventions. Precompetition medical assessment of athletes commonly includes assessment of movement quality while athletes perform standardised testing procedures.
