AJSM signin
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
First published on November 30, 2007, doi:10.1177/0363546507310074

(American Journal of Sports Medicine 2008;36:686.)

A more recent version of this article appeared on April 1, 2008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (AJSM PreView[PDF])
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
36/4/686    most recent
0363546507310074v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dun, S.
Right arrow Articles by Andrews, J. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dun, S.
Right arrow Articles by Andrews, J. R.

Article

A Biomechanical Comparison of Youth Baseball Pitches: Is the Curveball Potentially Harmful?

Shouchen Dun, MS1, Jeremy Loftice, CSCS1, Glenn S. Fleisig, PhD1*, David Kingsley2, James R. Andrews, MD1

1 American Sports Medicine Institute, Birmingham, Alabama
2 University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, Mississippi

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: glennf{at}asmi.org.


   Abstract

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.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JWatch PediatricsHome page
Is the Curveball Dangerous for Young Pitchers?
Journal Watch Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, June 25, 2008; 2008(625): 5 - 5.
[Full Text]




HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2007 by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine.