Workload Comparison of Contemporary Interval Throwing Programs and a Novel Optimized Program for Baseball Pitchers.

Background: In the rehabilitation of injured baseball pitchers, there is lack of consensus on how to guide a player back to pitching. It is unknown how different contemporary interval throwing programs (ITPs) progress in the amount of throwing workload. Purposes: To 1) evaluate three prominent ITPs commonly employed in baseball pitcher rehabilitation and assess whether these ITPs produce training loads that increase in a controlled, graduated manner and 2) devise an ITP that produced training loads which increased steadily over time. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Three publicly available ITPs from prominent sports medicine institutions were analyzed. Elbow varus torque per throw was calculated from a 2nd order polynomial regression based upon a relationship between recorded torque measurements and throwing distance measured from a database of 111,196 throws. The relative rate of workload increase was measured as an acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR). For each ITP, throw counts, daily/acute/chronic workloads, and ACWR were calculated and plotted over time. Finally, an original ITP was devised based upon a computational model that gradually increases ACWR over time and finished with an optimal chronic workload. Results: Each ITP exhibited a unique progression of throwing distances, quantities, and days to create different workload profiles. The three ITPs had throwing schedules ranging from 136 days to 187 days, ACWR spiked above or fell below a literature-defined "safe" range (i.e. 0.7 - 1.3) 19, 21, and 23 times. A novel ITP, predicated on a 146-day schedule and with a final chronic workload of 14.2, was designed to have no spikes outside of the safe range. Conclusion: Existing ITPs widely utilized for rehabilitation of baseball pitchers exhibit significantly inconsistent variation in the rate of throwing load progression. Computational modeling may facilitate more incremental workload progression in ITPs, thereby reducing injury during rehabilitation and more efficiently condition a pitcher for return to competition. Level of Evidence: 3b.

Return to sport after ACL reconstruction.

Objective guidelines permitting safe return to sport following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction are infrequently used. The purpose of this study was to determine the published return to sport guidelines following ACL reconstruction in Level I randomized controlled trials. A systematic review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Level I randomized controlled trials were included if they reported a minimum 2-year follow-up after ACL reconstruction and return to sport criteria. Outcomes analyzed were the timing of initiation of return to sport, follow-up duration, and use of quantitative/qualitative criteria to determine return to sport. Forty-nine studies were included (N=4178; 68% male; mean patient age, 27.5±3.2 years; mean follow-up, 3.0±1.9 years; mean time from injury to reconstruction, 379±321 days). Ninety-six percent of reconstructions used autograft and 87% were single-bundle reconstructions. Lysholm score, single-leg hop, isokinetic strength, and KT-1000 or KT-2000 arthrometer (MEDmetric, San Diego, California) testing were performed in 67%, 31%, 31%, and 82% of studies, respectively. Only 5 studies reported whether patients were able to successfully return to sport. Ninety percent and 65% of studies failed to use objective criteria or any criteria, respectively, to permit return to sport. Description of permission/allowance to return to sport was highly variable and poor. Twenty-four percent of studies failed to report when patients were allowed return to sport without restrictions. Overall, 39%, 45%, and 51% of studies permitted running at 3 months, return to cutting/pivoting sports at 6 months, and return to sport without restrictions at 6 months, respectively. Further research into validated return to sport guidelines is necessary to fill the existing void in contemporary literature and to guide clinical practice.