Recreational runners have an estimated overuse injury incidence rate of up to 79% and 90% for marathoners. A pre-participation screening tool that can identify risk for injury may help reduce overuse injury in runners. The Functional Movement Screen (FMS(TM)) is a reliable clinical tool used with athletes to help predict injury. To date, the FMS(TM) has not been used with endurance athletes. The purpose of this article is to establish normative FMS(TM) values for distance runners. 45 healthy runners performed the FMS(TM). Descriptive statistics were calculated; independent t-tests were performed to examine the effect of gender, experience and injury on scores. A Chi-square test was used to evaluate whether significant differences in scores exist for any component of the FMS(TM). The mean FMS(TM) score was 13.13±1.8. No significant differences in FMS(TM) scores were found between novice and experienced runners (p=0.71) or runners with a history of injury and those without (p=0.20). While male and female runners did not differ significantly in their total FMS(TM) score (p=0.65), significant differences were found in the deep squat (p<0.05), trunk stability push-up (p<0.001) and active straight leg raise components (p=0.002). This study provides normative values for FMS(TM) scores when testing uninjured distance runners.

Background: Contributing factors for arm injuries among baseball players have been described. However, no review has systematically identified risk factors with findings from prospective cohort studies. Purpose: To systematically review prospective cohort studies that investigated risk factors for arm injury among baseball players. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for relevant English-language studies. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened by 2 blinded reviewers to identify only prospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials. Two independent investigators screened each article for appropriate criteria. Results: Fourteen prospective articles were selected for this review. Youth, high school, and professional baseball players (N = 2426) were pooled, and 43 risk factors were assessed in relation to general arm, shoulder, and elbow injuries. All studies evaluated players for at least 1 season. Deficits in preseason shoulder range of motion and strength were significant risk factors for general arm or shoulder injury among high school and professional players. Elbow and shoulder varus torque at peak external shoulder rotation during pitching, high pitch velocity, and shoulder rotational and flexion deficits were risk factors for elbow injuries among professional pitchers. Pitching >100 innings in 1 year, being aged 9 to 11 years, being a pitcher or catcher, training >16 hours per week, and having a history of elbow pain were significant risk factors for elbow injury among youth players. Conclusion: History of elbow pain and age had a high risk of associated elbow injury among youth players. Training or pitching load also increased elbow injury risk for youth athletes. Loss of shoulder range of motion appears to increase risk for elbow injury among professional athletes. Single time-point data collections per season, studies with the same sample population, and studies with self-reported injury and risk factor data may limit the interpretation of these findings. Health care professionals should use caution when assessing injury risk during evaluation and making decisions about the training workload and playing time of baseball players.

In conjunction with traditional therapeutic interventions, real-time auditory and visual feedback should be considered for treating injured runners or addressing potentially injurious running mechanics in a healthy population.

No abstract

Background: Several recommendations have been made regarding pitch counts and workload for baseball players of different levels, including Little League, high school, collegiate, and professional baseball. However, little consensus is found in the literature regarding the scientific basis for many of these recommendations. Purpose: The primary purpose of this study was to summarize the evidence regarding immediate and long-term musculoskeletal responses to increasing pitching workload in baseball pitchers of all levels. A secondary purpose of this review was to evaluate the extent to which workload influences injury and/or performance in baseball pitchers. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: We performed a systematic search in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for studies addressing physiologic and/or pathologic musculoskeletal changes in response to a quantifiable pitching workload. We included studies examining the effects of pitching workload on performance, injury rate, and musculoskeletal changes in Little League, high school, collegiate, and professional baseball players. Results: We identified 28 studies that met our inclusion and exclusion criteria: 16 studies regarding Little League and high school pitchers and 12 studies regarding collegiate and professional pitchers. The current evidence presented suggests that increased pitching workload may be associated with an increased risk of pain, injury, and arm fatigue in Little League and high school pitchers. However, little consensus was found in the literature regarding the association between pitching workload and physiologic or pathologic changes in collegiate and professional pitchers. Conclusion: Evidence, although limited, suggests the use of pitch counts to decrease injury rates and pain in Little League and high school baseball pitchers. However, further research must be performed to determine the appropriate number of pitches (or throws) for players of different ages. This systematic review reported conflicting evidence regarding the use of pitch counts in college and professional baseball. Future high-quality research is required to determine the role, if any, of pitch counts for collegiate and professional pitchers.

No abstract

Agresta, CE, Church, C, Henley, J, Duer, T, and O'Brien, K. Single-leg squat performance in active adolescents aged 8-17 years. J Strength Cond Res 31(5): 1187-1191, 2017-More than 30 million U.S. adolescents participate in sport and exercise. Lower extremity injury from sport participation accounts for up to 89% of injuries each year. The single-leg squat (SLS) is a simple clinical tool that assesses lower extremity mechanics often associated with injury risk. To date, there is limited information regarding SLS performance in healthy children. Such information could be useful when assessing youth athletes to determine if mechanics demonstrated are different than is to be expected and puts them at the risk for injury. Furthermore, maturity status is thought to influence motor performance. Currently, there is no information regarding the influence of maturity status on SLS performance in adolescents. The purpose of our study was to determine SLS performance in relation to age and maturity level in adolescents. Forty-five children aged 8-17 years were videotaped performing a series of 10 squats using a standardized protocol. Standing height, seated height, and leg length measures were collected. Investigators scored the SLS test using specific scoring criteria. Adolescents were categorized into 3 maturity levels using a peak height velocity calculation. Multiple linear regression analyses and analysis of variance were used to analyze the data. Chronological age was a significant predictor of SLS performance with younger children having poorer SLS scores. Coaches and trainers should consider the chronological age of the youth athlete when assessing SLS performance. Furthermore, tailored training programs by age may help to address faulty areas, like single-leg stability, and improve overall functional performance.

Increased years of running experience does not appear to significantly influence running mechanics. However, age and running speed do influence biomechanical variables associated with injury in distance runners. Thus, there may be factors, other than running mechanics, that contribute to less risk in more experienced runners.