3.8 Article

Longitudinal study of elbow and shoulder pain in youth baseball pitchers

期刊

MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE
卷 33, 期 11, 页码 1803-1810

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00005768-200111000-00002

关键词

epidemiology; cohort study; arm injuries

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Previous studies among young pitchers have focused on the frequency and description of elbow injuries. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the frequency of elbow and shoulder complaints in young pitchers and to identify the associations between pitch types, pitch volume, and other risk factors for theses conditions. Methods: A prospective cohort study of 298 youth pitchers was conducted over two seasons. Each participant was contacted via telephone after each game pitched to identify arm complaints. Generalized estimating equations were used to assess associations between arm complaints and independent variables. Results: The frequency of elbow pain was 26%; that of shoulder pain, 32%. Risk factors for elbow pain were increased age, increased weight, decreased height, lifting weights during the season, playing baseball outside the league, decreased self-satisfaction, arm fatigue during the game pitched, and throwing fewer than 300 or more than 600 pitches during the season. Risk factors for shoulder pain included decreased satisfaction, arm fatigue during the game pitched, throwing more than 75 pitches in a game, and throwing fewer than 300 pitches during the season. Conclusion: Ann complaints are common, with nearly half of the subjects reporting pain. The factors associated with elbow and shoulder pain were different suggesting differing etiologies. Developmental factors may be important in both. To lower the risk of pain at both locations, young pitchers probably should not throw more than 75 pitches in a game. Other recommendations are to remove pitchers from a game if they demonstrate arm fatigue and limit pitching in nonleague games.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据