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

Abstract

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.

Comparação funcional entre membro dominante e não dominante em atletas com dor inguinal

“…A segunda limitação do trabalho é a heterogeneidade da amostra, que continha atletas de gêneros, idades e modalidades esportivas diferentes, sendo que esses dados influenciam na ADM do quadril como mostrado por Roach et al 21 Essas variantes são tão importantes que há trabalhos demonstrando resultados consistentes a respeito de diferenças do ADM do quadril de jogadores de beisebol. Picha et al 22 evidenciaram que jogadores de beisebol entre 7 e 11 anos de idade têm maior rotação interna que aqueles entre 12 e 18 anos de idade. De modo geral, a perna principal tinha mais rotação interna do que a perna de apoio.…”

Pitch Volume and Glenohumeral and Hip Motion and Strength in Youth Baseball Pitchers

“…A second examiner aligned the moveable arm of the goniometer along the tibial border and recorded the angle in degrees. 9,20 Intrarater reliability for hip ROM measures was high (ICC ¼ 0.93À0.98).…”

“…Recognizing alterations in physical characteristics, specifically range of motion (ROM) and strength, may help us to identify injury risk and develop targeted prevention strategies. 3,4,[8][9][10][11][12][13] Pitchers often present with an altered glenohumeral (GH) ROM profile, such that external rotation (ER) is increased and internal rotation (IR) is decreased due to humeral retroversion in the throwing arm compared with the nonthrowing arm. 14,15 The additional loss of IR ROM resulting from posterior soft tissue contracture has been identified as an injury risk factor.…”

Hip Range of Motion in Recreational Weight Training Participants: A Descriptive Report

“…Impaired hip ROM may be a relative factor needing to be considered for injury prevention and athletic performance, thus should be considered for inclusion when prescribing exercises for these individuals. 14,19,23 These data are the first to be reported among WT participants, thus should be considered for clinical practice when managing such patients. WT participants may have different values based upon the types of WT activities, performed, thus general population normative values may not be relevant.…”