Purpose: Musculoskeletal (MSK) screening tools can allow athletic trainers (AT) to focus prevention efforts by providing patient risk information. The purpose of this study is to examine lower extremity MSK screening tool practices and perceptions of ATs in traditional settings. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to 4,937 full- and part-time collegiate and secondary school ATs randomly selected by the NATA. MSK screening tools were grouped into 7 categories: Range of Motion (ROM), Strength, Balance, Drop and Jump Landing (D/J Land), Double- and Single-Leg Hopping (D/S Hop), Movement Quality (MQual), and Injury History (History). For each screening tool category, questions assessed MSK screening tool usage, the perceived effectiveness of MSK screening tools to provide relevant injury risk and return to play (RTP) information, and MSK screening tools effect on decisions to implement prevention programs. Results: A total of 372 participants (female=215(48.4%), male=152(34.2%), age=35±10 years, experience=12±10 years, secondary school=194(52.2%), collegiate=178(47.8%)) completed the survey. Participants within our study indicated the used of the following screening tools categories in clinical practice: ROM=339(91.1%), Strength=342(91.9%), Balance=238(64.0%), D/J-Landing=134(36.0%), D/S-Hopping=233(62.6%), MQual=212(57.0%), History=316(85.0%), and None=18(4.8%). Conclusions: ATs in traditional settings indicate that they primarily use ROM, Strength, and History screening tools to gather information concerning LE injury risk and RTP. Implementation of screening tools most frequently occurred post-injury. Lastly, it seemed that intervention prescriptions were consistent regardless of screening tool used, suggesting blanket interventions prescription. This may have been do feelings of moderate effectiveness of these tools to determine injury risk.

Figure 1.png (28 kB)
Figure 1

Figure 2.png (27 kB)
Figure 2

Figure 3.png (27 kB)
Figure 3

Figure 4.png (27 kB)
Figure 4

Figure 5.png (28 kB)
Figure 5

Figure 6.png (29 kB)
Figure 6

Figure 7.png (27 kB)
Figure 7

Figure 8.png (51 kB)
Figure 8

Figure 9.png (28 kB)
Figure 9