The Relationship Between Maximum Shoulder Horizontal Abduction and Adduction on Peak Shoulder Kinetics in Professional Pitchers.

BACKGROUND: Repetitive horizontal shoulder abduction during pitching can cause increased contact between the posterosuperior aspect of the glenoid and the greater tuberosity of the humeral head, theoretically putting baseball pitchers at increased risk of shoulder internal impingement and other shoulder pathologies. HYPOTHESIS: Increased shoulder horizontal abduction is associated with increased shoulder anterior force, while increased horizontal adduction is associated with increased shoulder distraction force. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive laboratory study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4. METHODS: A total of 339 professional baseball pitchers threw 8 to 10 fastball pitches using 3D motion capture (480 Hz). Pitchers were divided into 2 sets of quartiles based on maximum shoulder horizontal abduction and adduction. Elbow flexion, shoulder external rotation, and peak shoulder kinetics were compared between quartiles with post hoc linear regressions conducted for the entire cohort. RESULTS: At maximum shoulder horizontal abduction, there was no difference in ball velocity between quartiles (P = 0.76). For every 10º increase in maximum shoulder horizontal abduction, shoulder anterior force decreased by 2.2% body weight (BW) (P < 0.01, B = -0.22, ß = -0.38), shoulder adduction torque decreased by 0.5%BW × body height (BH) (P < 0.01, B = -0.05, ß = -0.19), and shoulder horizontal adduction torque decreased by 0.4%BW × BH (P < 0.01, B = -0.04, ß = -0.48). For every 10º increase in maximum shoulder horizontal adduction, shoulder anterior force increased by 2%BW and ball velocity decreased by 1.2 m/s (2.7 MPH). CONCLUSION: Professional pitchers with the least amount of maximum horizontal adduction had faster ball velocity and decreased shoulder anterior force. Pitchers with greater maximum shoulder horizontal abduction had decreased shoulder anterior force, shoulder adduction torque, and shoulder horizontal adduction torque. To maximize ball velocity as a performance metric while minimizing shoulder anterior force, pitchers can consider decreasing maximum shoulder adduction angles at later stages of the pitch. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Identifying risk factors for increased throwing shoulder kinetics (ie, shoulder anterior force, shoulder adduction torque) has potential implications in injury prevention. Specifically, mitigating shoulder anterior forces may be beneficial in reducing risk of injury.

The influence of shoulder abduction and external rotation on throwing arm kinetics in professional baseball pitchers.

Background: The relationships between shoulder abduction and external rotation with peak kinetic values at the shoulder and elbow in professional baseball pitchers are not well established. Methods: Professional pitchers (n = 322) threw 8-12 fastballs under 3D motion analysis (480 Hz). Pitchers were stratified into quartiles by shoulder abduction and external rotation at distinct timepoints. Regression analyses were performed to quantify associations between shoulder position and kinetics. Results: Shoulder abduction remained relatively consistent throughout the pitch (foot contact-ball release: 85.5 ± 11.1-90.7 ± 8.4°); shoulder external rotation increased dramatically (foot contact-ball release: 30.8 ± 24.6-165.2 ± 9.7°). For every 10° increase in maximum shoulder rotation, shoulder superior force increased by 2.3% body weight (p < 0.01), shoulder distraction force increased by 5.9% body weight (p < 0.01), and ball velocity increased by 0.60 m/s (p < 0.01). Shoulder abduction was significantly associated with shoulder superior force at all timepoints but not with ball velocity (p > 0.05). For every 10° increase in shoulder abduction at ball release, shoulder superior force increased by 3.7% body weight (p < 0.01) and shoulder distraction force increased by 11.7% body weight (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Increased shoulder abduction at ball release and increased maximum shoulder external rotation were associated with greater superior and distraction forces in the shoulder. Pitchers can consider decreasing shoulder abduction at later stages of the pitch to around 80° in order to minimize shoulder superior force, with no impact on ball velocity.

Kinematic and kinetic comparison between American and Japanese collegiate pitchers.

OBJECTIVES: Understanding the differences in baseball pitching biomechanics between American and Japanese pitchers may help with training and developing these athletes. The purpose of this study was to investigate the kinematic and kinetic differences in collegiate baseball pitchers from United States of American and Japan. DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Data were analyzed for 11 American and 11 Japanese collegiate pitchers throwing fastballs using 3D motion capture (480Hz). RESULTS: The Americans were heavier (95±7kg vs 81±7kg), taller (189±3cm vs 180±6cm), and had faster ball velocity (39±1m/s vs 35±2m/s). By the end of arm cocking phase, the American pitchers had rotated their shoulder to a greater degree (p=0.021, d=1.5) and at ball release the Japanese had greater knee flexion (p=0.020, d=1.2). American pitchers exhibited greater peak kinetics on the throwing arm; however, when normalized for height and weight only three differences remained. CONCLUSION: The differences found between the American and Japanese players could contribute to the increased ball velocity in the American pitchers. Additionally, throwing arm peak kinetics were greater in the American pitchers which may help generate greater ball velocity; however, increased kinetics may also lead to increased risk of injury.

Relationship between the foveal avascular zone and foveal pit morphology.

PURPOSE: To assess the relationship between foveal pit morphology and size of the foveal avascular zone (FAZ). METHODS: Forty-two subjects were recruited. Volumetric images of the macula were obtained using spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Images of the FAZ were obtained using either a modified fundus camera or an adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscope. Foveal pit metrics (depth, diameter, slope, volume, and area) were automatically extracted from retinal thickness data, whereas the FAZ was manually segmented by two observers to extract estimates of FAZ diameter and area. RESULTS: Consistent with previous reports, the authors observed significant variation in foveal pit morphology. The average foveal pit volume was 0.081 mm(3) (range, 0.022 to 0.190 mm(3)). The size of the FAZ was also highly variable between persons, with FAZ area ranging from 0.05 to 1.05 mm(2) and FAZ diameter ranging from 0.20 to 1.08 mm. FAZ area was significantly correlated with foveal pit area, depth, and volume; deeper and broader foveal pits were associated with larger FAZs. CONCLUSIONS: Although these results are consistent with predictions from existing models of foveal development, more work is needed to confirm the developmental link between the size of the FAZ and the degree of foveal pit excavation. In addition, more work is needed to understand the relationship between these and other anatomic features of the human foveal region, including peak cone density, rod-free zone diameter, and Henle fiber layer.