Functional Hip Characteristics of Baseball Pitchers and Position Players

Laudner, Kevin G.; Moore, Stephanie D.; Sipes, Robert C.; Meister, Keith

doi:10.1177/0363546509347365

Cited by 101 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a seated position, participants were asked to actively rotate the hips internally and externally while stabilizing the trunk and the hips placing their hands on the hips ( Figures 4A, B). The femur was stabilized to limit accessory motion, whereas the lower shank was rotated (internally and externally) until end ROM (11). Seated thoracic ROM assessment ( Figures 5A, B) was performed on a box (30 inches/76.2 cm high) with the hips and knees flexed at 908, and a ball (20 cm diameter) was placed between the knees to minimize motion of the lower extremities during thoracic rotation (9).…”

Section: Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Rotational Mobility and Power on Throwing Velocity

Talukdar

Cronin

Zois

et al. 2015

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Talukdar, K, Cronin, J, Zois, J, and Sharp, AP. The role of rotational mobility and power on throwing velocity. J Strength Cond Res 29(4): 905-911, 2015-Sound rotational power and mobility are an integral component in functional performances, such as throwing and striking. The purpose of this study was to examine the role of rotational power and mobility on cricket ball-throwing velocity. Eleven professional cricketers and 10 under-19 club-level cricketers performed the chop and lift, seated and standing cricket ball throw, seated and standing side medicine ball throw, and seated active thoracic rotation range of motion (ROM) and hip rotation ROM on one occasion. Participants were divided into 2 groups (fast and slow) based on their standing cricket ball-throwing velocity. The seated and standing cricket ball throw on the dominant side was significantly different (p , 0.00) between fast and slow throwers (11.03 and 10.7 km$h 21 , respectively). Muscular performance measures, such as bilateral thoracic rotation ROM, hip external rotation ROM on the dominant side, and force and work required in the chop, were significantly different (p # 0.05) between fast and slow throwers. Faster throwers in this study displayed greater force (18.4%) and work (31.2%) outputs in the chop compared with the slower throwers; however, slower throwers showed significantly greater ROM in the thoracic (13.4-16.8%) and hip regions (11.8%). It was concluded that greater ROM at proximal segments, such as hips and thoracic, may not increase throwing velocity in cricket as reduced ROM at proximal segments can be useful in transferring the momentum from the lower extremity in an explosive task such as throwing.

show abstract

Section: Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ROM was then measured with the moving arm of the goniometer while maximally rotating to one side (9). A digital inclinometer measuring angular position/displacement over the full 3608 with respect to the vertical axis was used for the hip rotation ROM assessment (11).…”

Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Rotational Mobility and Power on Throwing Velocity

Talukdar

Cronin

Zois

et al. 2015

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The importance of the kinetic chain is well accepted, yet research examining its effect on shoulder injury, specifically hip ROM and strength, is limited to adult populations. 4,12,13 The hips play an important role in the throwing motion; effective lead-leg ROM is necessary to generate force through the upper extremity to produce greater ball velocity. 13,14 Investigation suggests a relationship between hip and shoulder ROM and shoulder injury; however, this relationship has not been found in healthy professional baseball athletes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4,12,13 The hips play an important role in the throwing motion; effective lead-leg ROM is necessary to generate force through the upper extremity to produce greater ball velocity. 13,14 Investigation suggests a relationship between hip and shoulder ROM and shoulder injury; however, this relationship has not been found in healthy professional baseball athletes. 12 For pitchers and position athletes, Scher et al 4 found a moderate relationship between dominant-shoulder external-rotation ROM and nondominant hip-extension ROM in pitchers (r ¼ .62) and nonpitchers (r ¼ -.64) with a history of injury.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Glenohumeral and Hip Range-of-Motion and Strength Measures in Youth Baseball Athletes

Picha

Harding

Bliven

2016

Journal of Athletic Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: The repetitive demands of throwing affect glenohumeral (GH) range of motion (ROM) and strength. Less is known about hip alterations in skeletally immature athletes.Objective: To compare GH and hip ROM and strength between age, position, and side of youth baseball athletes.Design: Cross-sectional study. Main Outcome Measure(s): Bilateral GH and hip internaland external-rotation ROM were measured passively and summed for total arc of motion (TAM). Glenohumeral and hip rotation and gluteus medius strength were measured. Analyses included linear mixed models.Results: Glenohumeral internal rotation was less in throwing than in nonthrowing arms (P , .05) except in younger pitchers (P ¼ .86). Compared with older athletes, younger athletes had more GH external rotation (103.38 6 7.78 versus 97.58 6 9.48; P ¼ .002), TAM (156.48 6 8.78 versus 147.98 6 10.98; P ¼ .04), and external rotation in throwing compared with nonthrowing arms (101.98 6 1.28 versus 97.98 6 1.18; P , .001). Glenohumeral TAM was less in throwing than in nonthrowing arms (150.58 6 2.18 versus 154.98 6 1.38; P ¼ .01). Younger athletes had more hip internal rotation (38.98 6 6.88 versus 31.28 6 7.58; P , .001) and TAM (68.48 6 10.08 versus 60.78 6 9.88; P ¼ .001) than older athletes. Lead-leg hip internal-rotation ROM was greater than in the stance leg (34.88 6 8.98 versus 32.88 6 7.78; P ¼ .01). Overall, older players were stronger than younger players (P , .05), and the throwing arm was stronger in internal rotation than the nonthrowing arm (10.12 6 3.72 lb [4.59 6 1.69 kg] versus 9.43 6 3.18 lb [4.28 6 1.44 kg]; P ¼ .047).Conclusions: Youth baseball athletes had typical GH ROM adaptations of less internal rotation and more external rotation in the throwing versus the nonthrowing arm. Greater ROM in younger athletes may be explained by prepubertal characteristics. We obtained hip-strength values in youth baseball athletes, and as expected, older athletes were stronger.Key Words: shoulder, kinetic chain, adolescents, throwing athletes Key PointsYouth baseball athletes showed glenohumeral and hip adaptations between age groups. Glenohumeral range-of-motion adaptations typical in baseball athletes-less internal rotation and more external rotation-were present in participants as young as 8 years old.

show abstract

“…30,34,36,37,56,61 Pathomechanics of the throwing arm have been linked to glenohumeral internal rotation deficits, high maximum pitch velocity, limited trunk and hip rotation, and improper throwing mechanics. 1,2,11,17,21,30,31,53 However, to date, no studies have examined foot arch posture as a potential risk factor for shoulder and elbow injuries in baseball pitchers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%