NO DIFFERENCES IN HIP RANGE OF MOTION EXISTS BETWEEN BASEBALL PLAYERS WITH AN ULNAR COLLATERAL LIGAMENT TEAR AND HEALTHY BASEBALL PLAYERS.
baseball
hip ROM
ulnar collateral ligament
Journal
International journal of sports physical therapy
ISSN: 2159-2896
Titre abrégé: Int J Sports Phys Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101553140
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2019
Dec 2019
Historique:
entrez:
6
12
2019
pubmed:
6
12
2019
medline:
6
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Restrictions in hip rotational motion of the baseball athlete can alter throwing mechanics in a manner that is inefficient and increases risk of injury. The purpose of this study was to assess for differences in hip external rotation (ER) and internal rotation (IR) range of motion (ROM) between baseball players with an ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) tear and healthy baseball players. Case-control. Eighty-seven baseball players with a UCL tear (UCL) were compared with 87 age, experience, and position-matched healthy baseball players (CONT). UCL were enrolled at the initial visit to the outpatient sports medicine facility while CONT were measured before their baseball season. Passive hip ROM (ER and IR) of the stance and lead limbs was measured in the prone position using a bubble goniometer. Hip total range of motion (TRM) was calculated by adding ER and IR of each limb. Independent t-tests were run to compare mean group differences for hip ROM (p<0.05). No differences between groups were discovered for hip ER on the stance (UCL = 33.9 °±9.9 °, CONT = 34.3 °±10.6 °, p = 0.8) or lead (UCL = 32.9 °±9.9 °, CONT = 34.4 °±10.0 °, p = 0.3) limbs. Similarly, there were no group differences in hip IR on the stance (UCL = 30.6 °±10.5 °, CONT = 29.6 °±9.5 °, p = 0.5) or lead (UCL = 33.5 °±17.5 °, CONT = 29.5 °±9.0 °, p = 0.1) limbs. The groups were also similar in hip TRM on the stance (UCL = 64.5 °±13.7 °, CONT = 64.0 °±17.2 °, p = 0.8) and lead (UCL = 66.4 °±17.4 °, CONT = 63.9 °±15.6 °, p = 0.3) limbs. When measured in the prone position, hip passive ROM is not different between baseball players with a UCL tear compared to a matched healthy cohort. Level 3.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
Restrictions in hip rotational motion of the baseball athlete can alter throwing mechanics in a manner that is inefficient and increases risk of injury. The purpose of this study was to assess for differences in hip external rotation (ER) and internal rotation (IR) range of motion (ROM) between baseball players with an ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) tear and healthy baseball players.
DESIGN
METHODS
Case-control.
METHODS
METHODS
Eighty-seven baseball players with a UCL tear (UCL) were compared with 87 age, experience, and position-matched healthy baseball players (CONT). UCL were enrolled at the initial visit to the outpatient sports medicine facility while CONT were measured before their baseball season. Passive hip ROM (ER and IR) of the stance and lead limbs was measured in the prone position using a bubble goniometer. Hip total range of motion (TRM) was calculated by adding ER and IR of each limb. Independent t-tests were run to compare mean group differences for hip ROM (p<0.05).
RESULTS
RESULTS
No differences between groups were discovered for hip ER on the stance (UCL = 33.9 °±9.9 °, CONT = 34.3 °±10.6 °, p = 0.8) or lead (UCL = 32.9 °±9.9 °, CONT = 34.4 °±10.0 °, p = 0.3) limbs. Similarly, there were no group differences in hip IR on the stance (UCL = 30.6 °±10.5 °, CONT = 29.6 °±9.5 °, p = 0.5) or lead (UCL = 33.5 °±17.5 °, CONT = 29.5 °±9.0 °, p = 0.1) limbs. The groups were also similar in hip TRM on the stance (UCL = 64.5 °±13.7 °, CONT = 64.0 °±17.2 °, p = 0.8) and lead (UCL = 66.4 °±17.4 °, CONT = 63.9 °±15.6 °, p = 0.3) limbs.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
When measured in the prone position, hip passive ROM is not different between baseball players with a UCL tear compared to a matched healthy cohort.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
METHODS
Level 3.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
920-926Informations de copyright
© 2019 by the Sports Physical Therapy Section.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank the Texas Health Sports Medicine staff and research coordinators for their assistance in data collection. No outside funding was received for this work and no conflicts of interest exist.
Références
Am J Sports Med. 2010 Feb;38(2):383-7
pubmed: 19797617
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Apr;471(4):1084-91
pubmed: 23247816
J Sports Sci. 2015;33(14):1447-53
pubmed: 25529372
Am J Sports Med. 2014 Feb;42(2):430-6
pubmed: 24214927
J Sci Med Sport. 2015 Sep;18(5):581-4
pubmed: 25130280
Orthop J Sports Med. 2014 May 12;2(5):2325967114532424
pubmed: 26535327
Am J Sports Med. 2010 Dec;38(12):2487-93
pubmed: 20807860
Orthop J Sports Med. 2018 Apr 11;6(4):2325967118764657
pubmed: 29687011
J Athl Train. 2018 Jan;53(1):60-65
pubmed: 29283678
J Athl Train. 2010 Mar-Apr;45(2):191-7
pubmed: 20210623
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2015 Aug;10(4):505-13
pubmed: 26346849
J Athl Train. 2016 Jun 2;51(6):466-73
pubmed: 27441948
Am J Sports Med. 2015 Nov;43(11):2833-40
pubmed: 25587186
Hum Mov Sci. 2002 Oct;21(4):481-94
pubmed: 12450680
J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2016 Sep;60(3):233-240
pubmed: 27713579
Am J Sports Med. 2014 Oct;42(10):2502-9
pubmed: 25096304
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2018 May 1;26(9):e198-e206
pubmed: 29543598
Orthop J Sports Med. 2018 Feb 02;6(2):2325967117752105
pubmed: 29435468
Sports Health. 2012 Jan;4(1):17-24
pubmed: 23016064
Am J Sports Med. 1998 May-Jun;26(3):420-4
pubmed: 9617406
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Oct;23(10):1521-6
pubmed: 25220199
Am J Sports Med. 2015 Jul;43(7):1764-9
pubmed: 25925603
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 Sep;24(9):1339-45
pubmed: 25842029
Orthop J Sports Med. 2014 Feb 13;2(2):2325967114521575
pubmed: 26535297
J Sports Sci. 2016;34(9):856-61
pubmed: 26256828
PM R. 2016 Mar;8(3 Suppl):S69-77
pubmed: 26972269
J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Oct;30(10):2823-7
pubmed: 25486297
Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2015 Dec 28;7(4):6142
pubmed: 26793294
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018 May;27(5):871-878
pubmed: 29680328