Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros




Base de datos
Asunto de la revista
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Orthop J Sports Med ; 11(9): 23259671231199085, 2023 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37781638

RESUMEN

Background: Although pitch count and rest guidelines have been promoted for youth and adolescent baseball players for nearly 2 decades, compliance with guidelines remains poorly understood. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of compliance with Major League Baseball (MLB) Pitch Smart guidelines as well as the association between compliance and range of motion (ROM), strength, velocity, injury, and pitcher utilization. It was hypothesized that pitchers in violation of current recommendations would have increased strength, velocity, and injury. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: This was a prospective, multicenter study of 115 high school pitchers throughout the United States. Pitchers were surveyed about their compliance with current off-season, rest-related guidelines, and history of injury. During the preseason, pitchers underwent standardized physical examinations, and pitch velocity was measured. Pitch counts were collected during the baseball season that followed. Dynamometer strength testing of shoulder forward flexion, and external rotation as well as grip strength was recorded. We compared pitchers who were compliant with recommendations with those who were noncompliant using Student t and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Based on preseason data, 84% of pitchers had violated current Pitch Smart guidelines. During the season, 14% had at least 1 violation of the Pitch Smart guidelines. Across both the preseason survey and in-season pitch counts, 89% of players had at least 1 violation of the Pitch Smart guidelines. While there were no significant differences in ROM or strength, the noncompliant group had higher maximum pitch velocity than the compliant group (74 ± 8 vs 69 ± 5 mph [119 ± 13 vs 111 ± 8 kph], respectively; P = .009). Players' self-reported velocity differed significantly from the direct measurement, for both peak velocity (80 ± 6 vs 73 ± 8 mph [129 ± 9 vs 117 ± 13 kph], respectively; P < .001) and mean velocity (73 ± 8 vs 53 ± 27 mph [117 ± 13 vs 85 ± 43 kph], respectively; P < .001). Conclusion: Most high school pitchers were not fully compliant with current Pitch Smart guidelines, and they tended to overestimate their peak velocity by 7 mph (11 kph). Pitchers who threw with greater velocity were at higher risk for violating Pitch Smart recommendations.

2.
J Strength Cond Res ; 37(3): 623-628, 2023 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35836313

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT: Orishimo, KF, Kremenic, IJ, Mullaney, MJ, Fukunaga, T, Serio, N, and McHugh, MP. Role of pelvis and trunk biomechanics in generating ball velocity in baseball pitching. J Strength Cond Res 37(3): 623-628, 2023-The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of pelvis rotation velocity, trunk rotation velocity, and hip-shoulder separation on ball velocity during baseball pitching. Fastball pitching kinematics were recorded in 29 male pitchers (age 17 ± 2 years, 23 high school, 6 college). Pelvis and trunk angular velocities and hip-shoulder separation were calculated and averaged for the 3 fastest pitches. Associations between peak pelvis velocity, peak trunk velocity, hip-shoulder separation at foot contact, and ball velocity were assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients and multiple regression. The average ball velocity was 33.5 ± 2.8 m·s -1 . The average hip-shoulder separation at foot contact was 50 ± 12°. The peak pelvis velocity (596 ± 88°·s -1 ) occurred at 12 ± 11% of the time from stride foot contact to ball release, with the peak trunk velocity (959 ± 120°·s -1 ) occurring at 36 ± 11%. Peak trunk velocity was predictive of ball velocity ( p = 0.002), with 25% of the variability in ball velocity explained. No combination of factors further explained ball velocity. Hip-shoulder separation at foot contact (17%, p = 0.027), peak pelvis velocity (23%, p = 0.008), and the timing of peak pelvis velocity (16%, p = 0.031) individually predicted peak trunk velocity. The combination of peak pelvis velocity, hip-shoulder separation at foot contact, and the timing of peak trunk velocity explained 55% of the variability in trunk rotation velocity ( p < 0.001). These data highlight the importance of interactions between pelvis and trunk for maximizing velocity in pitching. Training to improve pelvis-trunk axial dissociation may increase maximal trunk rotation velocity and thereby increase ball velocity without increasing training load on the shoulder and elbow.


Asunto(s)
Béisbol , Torso , Humanos , Masculino , Adolescente , Adulto Joven , Adulto , Fenómenos Biomecánicos , Pelvis , Hombro
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA