2014
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-014-1144-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computing Muscle, Ligament, and Osseous Contributions to the Elbow Varus Moment During Baseball Pitching

Abstract: Baseball pitching imposes a dangerous valgus load on the elbow that puts the joint at severe risk for injury. The goal of this study was to develop a musculoskeletal modeling approach to enable evaluation of muscle-tendon contributions to mitigating elbow injury risk in pitching. We implemented a forward dynamic simulation framework that used a scaled biomechanical model to reproduce a pitching motion recorded from a high school pitcher. The medial elbow muscles generated substantial, protective, varus elbow m… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
35
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
(74 reference statements)
0
35
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…By interpreting a net joint force as a joint contact force, one may greatly underestimate the loads experienced by tissues at/within the joint, since forces from muscles and other internal tissues are not included (Figure 1). For instance, the net joint force on the elbow is about 1-1.5 body weights during baseball pitching (e.g., Fleisig et al [21,22]), whereas the elbow joint contact force peaks between 4-7 body weights [23]. Similarly, during squatting, net joint force calculated from inverse dynamics on the knee is about 1-1.5 body weights [24,25], whereas the joint contact force is much larger, about 2-3.5 body weights [25].…”
Section: Joint Contact Forcementioning
confidence: 99%
“…By interpreting a net joint force as a joint contact force, one may greatly underestimate the loads experienced by tissues at/within the joint, since forces from muscles and other internal tissues are not included (Figure 1). For instance, the net joint force on the elbow is about 1-1.5 body weights during baseball pitching (e.g., Fleisig et al [21,22]), whereas the elbow joint contact force peaks between 4-7 body weights [23]. Similarly, during squatting, net joint force calculated from inverse dynamics on the knee is about 1-1.5 body weights [24,25], whereas the joint contact force is much larger, about 2-3.5 body weights [25].…”
Section: Joint Contact Forcementioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, the net joint force on the elbow is about 1-1.5 body weights during baseball pitching (e.g., [21,22]), whereas the elbow joint contact force peaks between 4-7 body weights [23]. Similarly, during squatting, net joint force on the knee is about 1-1.5 body weights [24,25], whereas the joint contact force is much larger, about 2-3.5 body weights [25].…”
Section: Joint Reaction Forcesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anatomical studies indicate that the FPMs lie in a good position to protect the UCL [6,8]. Biomechanical studies report that the flexor digitorum superficialis (FDS) muscle plays the greatest role among the FPMs as an active stabilizer against valgus stress [10,11,13,16]. Ultrasonographic (US) studies report that the FDS has significant effects on medial joint distance (MJD) through grip contraction [14,17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%