Shoulder Internal Rotation Torque Research Articles

Associations Between Timing in the Baseball Pitch and Shoulder Kinetics, Elbow Kinetics, and Ball Speed

Background: A baseball pitcher’s ability to maximize ball speed while avoiding shoulder and elbow injuries is an important determinant of a successful career. Pitching injuries are attributed to microtrauma brought about by the repetitive stress of high-magnitude shoulder and elbow kinetics. Hypothesis: Over a number of pitches, variations in timing peak angular velocities of trunk segment rotations will be significantly associated with ball speed and upper extremity kinetic parameters. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: Kinematic and kinetic data were derived from 9 to 15 fastball pitches performed by 16 active, healthy collegiate (n = 8) and professional (n = 8) pitchers via 3-dimensional motion capture (240 Hz). Each pitch was decomposed into 4 phases corresponding to the time between peak angular velocities of sequential body segment rotations. Four mixed models were used to evaluate which phases varied significantly in relation to ball speed, peak shoulder proximal force, peak shoulder internal rotation torque, and peak elbow varus torque. Mixed-model parameter coefficient estimates were used to quantify the influence of these variations in timing on ball speed and upper extremity kinetics. Results: All 4 mixed models were significant (P < .05). The time from stride-foot contact to peak pelvis angular velocity varied significantly in relation to all upper extremity kinetic parameters and ball speed. Increased time in this phase correlated with decreases in all parameters. Decreased ball speed also correlated with increased time between peak upper torso and elbow extension angular velocities. Decreased shoulder proximal force also correlated with increased time between peak pelvis and upper torso angular velocities. Conclusion: There are specific phases that vary in relation to ball speed and upper extremity kinetic parameters, reinforcing the importance of effectively and consistently timing segmental interactions. For the specific interactions that varied significantly, increased phase times were associated with decreased kinetics and ball speed. Clinical Relevance: Although increased time within specific phases correlates with decreases in the magnitude of upper extremity kinetics linked to overuse injuries, it also correlates with decreased ball speed. Based on these findings, it may appear that minimizing the risk of injury (ie, decreased kinetics) and maximizing performance quality (ie, increased ball speed) are incompatible with one another. However, there may be an optimal balance in timing that is effective for satisfying both outcomes.

Kinetics of the upper limb during table tennis topspin forehands in advanced and intermediate players

The purpose of this study was to determine the significance of mechanical energy generation and transfer in the upper limb in generating the racket speed during table tennis topspin forehands. Nine advanced and eight intermediate table tennis players performed the forehand stroke at maximum effort against light and heavy backspin balls. Five high-speed video cameras operating at 200 fps were used to record the motions of the upper body of the players. The joint forces and torques of the racket arm were determined with inverse dynamics, and the amount of mechanical energy generated and transferred in the arm was determined. The shoulder internal rotation torque exerted by advanced players was significantly larger than that exerted by the intermediate players. Owing to a larger shoulder internal rotation torque, the advanced players transferred mechanical energy from the trunk of the body to the upper arm at a higher rate than the intermediate players could. Regression of the racket speed at ball impact on the energy transfer to the upper arm suggests that increase in the energy transfer may be an important factor for enabling intermediate players to generate a higher racket speed at impact in topspin forehands.

Biomechanical Comparison of Baseball Pitching and Long-Toss: Implications for Training and Rehabilitation

Controlled laboratory study. To test for kinematic and kinetic differences between baseball pitching from a mound and long-toss on flat ground. Long-toss throws from flat ground are commonly used by baseball pitchers for rehabilitation, conditioning, and training. However, there is controversy over the biomechanics and functionality of such throws. Seventeen healthy, college baseball pitchers pitched fastballs 18.4 m from a mound to a strike zone, and threw 37 m, 55 m, and maximum distance from flat ground. For the 37-m and 55-m throws, participants were instructed to throw "hard, on a horizontal line." For the maximum-distance throw, no constraint on trajectory was given. Kinematics and kinetics were measured with a 3-dimensional, automated motion analysis system. Repeated-measures analyses of variance, with post hoc paired t tests, were used to compare the 4 throw types within pitchers. At foot contact, the participant's shoulder line was nearly horizontal when pitching from a mound and became progressively more inclined as throwing distance increased. At arm cocking, the greatest amount of shoulder external rotation (mean ± SD, 180° ± 11°), elbow flexion (109° ± 10°), shoulder internal rotation torque (101 ± 17 Nm), and elbow varus torque (100 ± 18 Nm) were measured during the maximum-distance throws. Elbow extension velocity was also greatest for the maximum-distance throws (2573°/s ± 203°/s). Forward trunk tilt at the instant of ball release decreased as throwing distance increased. Hard, horizontal, flat-ground throws have biomechanical patterns similar to those of pitching and are, therefore, reasonable exercises for pitchers. However, maximum-distance throws produce increased torques and changes in kinematics. Caution is, therefore, advised in the use of these throws for rehabilitation and training.

A Biomechanical Comparison of Youth Baseball Pitches

Background The curveball has been anecdotally considered as a dangerous pitch among youth pitchers, especially for their ulnar collateral ligaments. No biomechanical studies have been conducted among youth pitchers comparing different types of pitches. Hypothesis The kinetics of the baseball throw varies significantly between the fastball, curveball, and change-up for youth pitchers. Kinematic and temporal differences are also expected. Study Design Controlled laboratory study. Methods Twenty-nine youth baseball pitchers (age, 12.5 ± 1.7 years) pitched 5 fastballs, 5 curveballs, and 5 change-ups with maximum effort in an indoor laboratory setting. Data were collected with a 3-dimensional motion analysis system. Kinetic, kinematic, and temporal parameters were compared among the 3 pitches. Results For elbow varus torque, shoulder internal rotation torque, elbow proximal force, and shoulder proximal force, the fastball produced the greatest values, followed by the curveball and then the change-up. The fastball also produced the greatest elbow flexion torque. Shoulder horizontal adduction torque and shoulder adduction torque were the least for the change-up. Several differences in body segment position, velocity, and timing were also found. Conclusions In general, elbow and shoulder loads were the greatest in the fastball and least in the change-up. Kinematic and temporal differences were also found among the 3 pitch types. Clinical Relevance The curveball may not be more potentially harmful than the fastball for youth pitchers. This finding is consistent with recent epidemiologic research indicating that amount of pitching is a stronger risk factor than type of pitches thrown.

Kinematics and kinetics of youth baseball pitching with standard and lightweight balls

Because youth athletes are smaller and weaker than their adult counterparts, smaller equipment and fields are often used in youth sports. Previous research has shown that youth baseball pitchers use similar motions to older pitchers, but generate lower kinetics and angular velocities at the shoulder and elbow. The purpose of this study was to determine potential biomechanical benefits for youth pitchers to use lighter baseballs. Thirty-four youth (11.1 ± 0.7 years) pitchers pitched both standard [5 ounce (142 g)] and lightweight [4 ounce(113 g)] baseballs in a laboratory setting. Kinematic and kinetic parameters were measured with a six-camera high-speed motion analysis system. Three repeated measures MANOVAs were used to compare (p > 0.05) position, velocity, and kinetic parameters between the standard and lightweight baseballs. Subjective data were also collected. Pitching the lightweight ball produced no difference in arm position, but greater shoulder, elbow, and ball velocities. With the lightweight ball, pitchers produced decreased kinetics.Post-hoc analysis of the kinetic data revealed significant decreases in elbow varus torque and shoulder internal rotation torque. The data suggest that playing with lightweight baseballs may reduce the risk of overuse injury in the youth pitcher and also help develop arm speed. However, before introducing lightweight baseballs into the youth game, the effect of lighter, faster pitched balls for the batters and fielders should also be considered.

Valgus torque in youth baseball pitchers: a biomechanical study

The purpose of this study was to determine the biomechanical and anthropometric factors contributing to elbow valgus torque during pitching. Video data of 14 youth pitchers throwing fastballs were used to calculate shoulder and elbow kinematics and kinetics. Peak elbow valgus torque averaged 18 Nm and occurred just before maximal shoulder external rotation. The magnitude of valgus torque was most closely correlated with the thrower's weight. When subject weight and height were controlled for, maximum shoulder abduction torque and maximum shoulder internal rotation torque were most strongly associated with elbow valgus torque, accounting for 85% of its variance ( P < .001). When only kinematic variables were considered, maximum shoulder external rotation accounted for 33% of the variance in valgus torque. Given that the biomechanical variables correlated with peak valgus torque are not easily modifiable, limiting the number of innings pitched is likely the best way to reduce elbow injury in youth pitchers.

多自由度リンク機構による投球腕の動力学モデル(野球(2))

In this study, upper extremity of overhand throwing motion was modeled as the link segment system including three segments (humerus, forearm and hand) and 7 degrees of freedom of joint motions. Throwing motions of 3 subjects were filmed from 5 high-speed cameras and joint torques were calculated using the inverse dynamics. The relationships between the joint torques and the velocity of distal end point of upper extremity were analyzed. The results showed that shoulder internal rotation torque (IR) contributed greatly to production of ball velocity and shoulder horizontal adduction torque (HAD) contributed production of elbow velocity. Because of the interaction of IR and HAD, proximal to distal sequential motion of throwing arm was occurred.

Baseball

The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare kinematic, temporal, and kinetic characteristics of American and Korean professional pitchers in order to investigate differences in pitching mechanics, performance, and injury risks among two different cultures and populations of baseball pitchers. Eleven American and eight Korean healthy professional baseball pitchers threw multiple fastball pitches off an indoor throwing mound positioned at regulation distance from home plate. A Motion Analysis three‐dimensional automatic digitizing system was used to collect 200 Hz video data from four electronically synchronized cameras. Twenty kinematic, six temporal, and 11 kinetic variables were analyzed at lead foot contact, during the arm cocking and arm acceleration phases, at ball release, and during the arm deceleration phase. A radar gun was used to quantify ball velocity. At lead foot contact, the American pitchers had significantly greater horizontal abduction of the throwing shoulder, while Korean pitchers exhibited significantly greater abduction and external rotation of the throwing shoulder. During arm cocking, the American pitchers displayed significantly greater maximum shoulder external rotation and maximum pelvis angular velocity. At the instant of ball release, the American pitchers had significantly greater forward trunk tilt and ball velocity and significantly less knee flexion, which help explain why the American pitchers had 10% greater ball velocity compared to the Korean pitchers. The American pitchers had significantly greater maximum shoulder internal rotation torque and maximum elbow varus torque during arm cocking, significantly greater elbow flexion torque during arm acceleration, and significantly greater shoulder and elbow proximal forces during arm deceleration. While greater shoulder and elbow forces and torques generated in the American pitchers helped generate greater ball velocity for the American group, these greater kinetics may predispose this group to a higher risk of shoulder and elbow injuries.

Biomechanics of overhand throwing with implications for injuries.

Proper throwing mechanics may enable an athlete to achieve maximum performance with minimum chance of injury. While quantifiable differences do exist in proper mechanics for various sports, certain similarities are found in all overhand throws. One essential property is the utilisation of a kinetic chain to generate and transfer energy from the larger body parts to the smaller, more injury-prone upper extremity. This kinetic chain in throwing includes the following sequence of motions: stride, pelvis rotation, upper torso rotation, elbow extension, shoulder internal rotation and wrist flexion. As each joint rotates forward, the subsequent joint completes its rotation back into a cocked position, allowing the connecting segments and musculature to be stretched and eccentrically loaded. Most notable is the external rotation of the shoulder, which reaches a maximum value of approximately 180 degrees. This biomechanical measurement is a combination of true glenohumeral rotation, trunk hyperextension and scapulothoracic motion. Near the time of maximum shoulder external rotation (ERmax), shoulder and elbow musculature eccentrically contract to produce shoulder internal rotation torque and elbow varus torque. Both the shoulder and the elbow are susceptible to injury at this position. At ball release, significant energy and momentum have been transferred to the ball and throwing arm. After ball release, a kinetic chain is used to decelerate the rapidly moving arm with the entire body. Shoulder and elbow muscles produce large compressive forces to resist joint distraction. Both joints are susceptible to injury during arm deceleration.

Kinetics of baseball pitching with implications about injury mechanisms.

Elbow and shoulder kinetics for 26 highly skilled, healthy adult pitchers were calculated using high-speed motion analysis. Two critical instants were 1) shortly before the arm reached maximum external rotation, when 67 N-m of shoulder internal rotation torque and 64 N-m of elbow varus torque were generated, and 2) shortly after ball release, when 1090 N of shoulder compressive force was produced. Inability to generate sufficient elbow varus torque may result in medial tension, lateral compression, or posteromedial impingement injury. At the glenohumeral joint, compressive force, joint laxity, and 380 N of anterior force during arm cocking can lead to anterior glenoid labral tear. Rapid internal rotation in combination with these forces can produce a grinding injury factor on the labrum. After ball release, 400 N of posterior force, 1090 N of compressive force, and 97 N-m of horizontal abduction torque are generated at the shoulder; contribution of rotator cuff muscles in generating these loads may result in cuff tensile failure. Horizontal adduction, internal rotation, and superior translation of the abducted humerus may cause subacromial impingement. Tension in the biceps tendon, due to muscle contraction for both elbow flexion torque and shoulder compressive force, may tear the anterosuperior labrum.