Energy generation, absorption, and transfer at the shoulder and elbow in youth baseball pitchers

Length-Tension Differences Between Concentric and Eccentric Shoulder Rotation Strength

ABSTRACT

Giordano, KA, Cassidy, MM, and Oliver, GD. Length-tension differences between concentric and eccentric shoulder rotation strength. J Strength Cond Res 38(2): 253-258, 2024-Eccentric contractions generally produce more force than concentric contractions. However, if length-tension relationships affect both contractions equally remains unknown. Therefore, our purpose was to compare concentric versus eccentric shoulder external and internal rotation strength across a continuous 90° arc. Fifty-two physically active individuals performed isokinetic concentric and eccentric shoulder external rotation and internal rotation through a 90° arc (forearm horizontal to forearm vertical) with the shoulder elevated in both the frontal and scapular planes. Statistical parametric mapping analysis compared concentric and eccentric trials within subjects. Frontal plane eccentric external rotation torque was greater than concentric 30°-90° (p < 0.01) external rotation, and concentric external rotation torque was greater 5°-15° external rotation (p = 0.01). Frontal plane, eccentric internal rotation torque was greater than concentric 15°-55° external rotation (p < 0.01), and concentric torque was greater at forearm horizontal (p = 0.05) and 70°-90° external rotation (p < 0.01). Scapular plane eccentric external rotation torque was greater than concentric 30°-90° external rotation (p < 0.01) and concentric external rotation torque was greater 5°-20° external rotation (p < 0.01). Scapular plane eccentric internal rotation torque was greater than concentric 15°-60° external rotation (p < 0.01), and concentric torque was greater at forearm horizontal (p = 0.05) and 78°-90° external rotation (p = 0.02). Coaches, clinicians, and researchers should interpret data from studies reporting isokinetic data with the understanding that isokinetic peak strength values are not comparing the same muscle length and are not an appropriate measure for all muscle lengths. Furthermore, shoulder stability is affected through decreased eccentric force production at end ranges of shoulder rotation.

Energy flow in men's javelin throw and its relationship to joint load and performance

Background

Performance in javelin throwing is dependent on the release speed and therefore the energy transferred to the javelin. Little is known about the flow of mechanical energy in javelin throwing and whether there is a connection to joint loading and throwing performance. The purpose of the study was therefore to investigate (1) the energy flow within the kinetic chain of the throwing arm, (2) how it is related to performance and joint loads and (3) how joint forces and torques are used to transfer, generate and absorb mechanical energy.

Methods

The kinematics of 10 experienced javelin throwers were recorded using a 12-camera infrared system. 16 markers were placed on the athlete's body, five on the javelin to track the movement of each segment. A segmental power analysis was carried out to calculate energy flow between upper body, upper arm, forearm and hand. Stepwise regression analysis was used to calculate the variable that best predicts release speed and joint loads.

Results

The results indicate that the higher the peak rate of energy transfer from the thorax to the humerus, the higher the release speed and the joint loads. While there were no differences between the peak rate of energy transfer in the different joints, the energy transferred differed depending on whether joint forces or torques were used. It can be further shown that higher joint torques and thus higher rotational kinetics at the shoulder are linked to higher release speeds. Thus, the movements of the upper body can be of great influence on the result in javelin throwing. Furthermore, the data show that athletes who are able to transfer more energy through the shoulder, rather than generate it, experience a smaller joint loading. An effective technique for improved energy transfer can thus help perform at the same level while lowering joint stress or have higher performance at the same joint loading.

Fastball pitching performance only slightly decreases after mobility impediment of the pelvis and trunk-Do (catch-up) compensation strategies come into play?

Background

Baseball pitching performance can be mechanically explained by the summation of speed principle and the principle of optimal coordination of partial momenta. Impeding optimal energy generation or transfer by or between the pelvis and trunk segments could provide valuable insight into possible compensation or catch-up mechanisms that may manifest themselves based on these principles.

Aim

The aim of the present study was to explore the effects of experimentally impeding the mobility of and between the pelvis and trunk segments (1) on ball speed and mechanical peak joint power, and (2) on mechanical peak load of the elbow and shoulder joints at maximal external rotation (MER) during fastball pitching.

Methods

Eleven elite baseball pitchers (mean age 17.4, SD 2.2 years; mean pitching experience 8.9, SD 3.0 years) were instructed to throw at least 15 fastballs as fast and accurately as possible under two conditions. One condition involved impeding the mobility of the pelvis and trunk segments to hamper their ability to rotate independently, which consequently should affect the separation time, defined as the time interval between the pelvis and trunk peak angular velocities. In the other condition, pitchers threw unimpeded. Ball speed, mechanical peak joint power and peak net moment of the elbow and shoulder at MER were compared between conditions using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE).

Results

In the impeded pitching condition, the mean difference of the separation time was 12.4 milliseconds [95% CI (4.0, 20.7)] and for ball speed 0.6 mph [95% CI (0.2, 0.9)] lower compared to the unimpeded condition. Only the peak pelvic angular velocity, in addition to the trunk, upper arm and forearm, was 45 deg/s [95% CI (24, 66)] higher impeded condition. The mean differences of the joint power and net moments at the shoulder and elbow did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusion

In elite adolescent baseball, the observed pitching performance after experimentally impeding pelvic and trunk mobility undermines a potential distal catch-up strategy based on the summation of speed principle. The increased peak pelvic angular velocity may indicate a compensation strategy following the optimal coordination of partial momenta principle to practically maintain pitching performance.

Lower body energy generation, absorption, and transfer in youth baseball pitchers

An efficient baseball pitch will produce a high-velocity ball while minimizing the risk of injury to the pitcher. This study quantified ground reaction forces and lower body power during the entire pitching motion of youth baseball pitchers to investigate how developing athletes generate and transfer energy from lower limbs to the throwing arm. These data provide a foundation for comparing youth pitching strategy and mechanics to optimal throwing mechanics and may aid in developing appropriate training suggestions for this age group. Full-body three-dimensional (3D) motion capture and force platform data were collected on 23 youth pitchers performing fastballs thrown for strikes. Youth pitchers within this study used a “controlled drop” strategy in which the COM was lowered during the stride phase followed by a weak forward drive motion. Ground reaction forces (GRFs) indicate that the drive leg propels the center of mass (COM) toward the home plate while the stride leg braking force contributes to power generation up the kinetic chain. The stride hip generates energy assisting in energy flow up the kinetic chain as well as the creation of a stable base to rotate the trunk about. The lumbosacral joint generates the most energy of any joint studied, facilitating energy flow up the kinetic chain and underscoring the importance of core strength and coordination in proper pitching mechanics.

Disabled Throwing Shoulder 2021 Update: Part 1-Anatomy and Mechanics

The purpose of this article is to provide updated information for sports health care specialists regarding the Disabled Throwing Shoulder (DTS). A panel of experts, recognized for their experience and expertise in this field, was assembled to address and provide updated information on several topics that have been identified as key areas in creating the DTS spectrum. Each panel member submitted a concise presentation on one of the topics within these areas, each of which were then edited and sent back to the group for their comments and consensus agreement in each area. Part 1 presents the following consensus conclusions and summary findings regarding anatomy and mechanics, including: 1) The current understanding of the DTS identifies internal impingement, resulting from a combination of causative factors, as the final common pathway for the great majority of the labral pathoanatomy; 2) intact labral anatomy is pivotal for glenohumeral stability, but its structure does not control or adapt well to shear or translational loads; 3) the biceps plays an active role in dynamic glenohumeral stability by potentiating "concavity compression" of the glenohumeral joint; 4) the ultimate function of the kinetic chain is to optimize the launch window, the precise biomechanical time, and position for ball release to most effectively allow the ball to be thrown with maximum speed and accuracy, and kinetic chain function is most efficient when stride length is optimized; 5) overhead throwing athletes demonstrate adaptive bony, capsular, and muscular changes in the shoulder with repetitive throwing, and precise measurement of shoulder range of motion in internal rotation, external rotation, and external rotation with forearm pronation is essential to identify harmful and/or progressive deficits. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Segment power analysis of collegiate softball hitting

The primary aim of this investigation was to describe the energy flow through the kinetic chain during softball hitting using a segmental power analysis. Twenty-three NCAA Division I collegiate softball athletes (20.4 ± 1.7 yr; 166.7 ± 22.0 cm; 74.9 ± 15.9 kg) performed three maximum effort swings off a stationary tee placed in the middle of the strike zone. Pelvis, trunk, humerus, forearm and hand segment powers were integrated across four phases of the softball swing (load, stride, acceleration, and follow-through). The load and stride phases had low segment energy inflow and outflow values as well as net segment energy flow for all body segments compared to subsequent phases of the swing. The acceleration phase showed large trunk inflow values relative to the pelvis. There was also descriptively larger front compared to back-side upper extremity inflow. Finally, the follow-through phase showed primarily energy outflow for the upper extremity segments likely attributed to slowing down rotation.