Edited by: Laura E. Diamond, Griffith University, Australia
Reviewed by: Georgios Sofianidis, Metropolitan College, Greece; Christopher Thompson, Temple University, United States
This article was submitted to Biomechanics and Control of Human Movement, a section of the journal Frontiers in Sports and Active Living
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
High body fat percentage (bf%) is considered a potential injury risk factor for softball pitchers amidst the already high rates of pitching-related injury. Similarly, research points out that large bilateral asymmetries are another risk factor for softball pitchers. As softball pitching is a highly asymmetric sport and the repetitive nature of the windmill pitch places high stress on the body while pitchers are in unbalanced and asymmetric positions, research examining body composition and asymmetry is necessary.
The purpose of this study was to compare functional characteristics of softball pitchers with a healthy and a high bf%. Bilateral symmetry was assessed for pitchers' hip and shoulder isometric strength (ISO) and range of motion (ROM) between the following two groups of softball pitchers: (1) those with a high bf% (≥32%) and (2) those with a healthy bf% (<32%).
A total of 41 high school female softball pitchers from the southern United States agreed to participate (1.69 ± 0.07 m, 76.14 ± 17.08 kg, 15.1 ± 1.1 years). Pitchers completed a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan and were grouped into one of the following two categories based on their bf%: healthy (<32 bf%) and high (≥32 bf%). Bilateral symmetry was assessed for pitchers' hip and shoulder ISO and ROM using a handheld dynamometer and inclinometer, respectively. Bilateral arm bone and lean mass was also measured
Mixed analyses of variance revealed a significant interaction between bf% groups and side dominance for internal rotation shoulder ROM, F(1, 39) = 14.383,
Asymmetries and slight differences in functional characteristics exist between bf% groups. Altered functional characteristics may influence pitchers' windmill pitch movement and should be acknowledged by support staff to improve softball pitchers' health and longevity.
Insight into asymmetries can help researchers and clinicians understand the implication of excess body fat and further theorize mechanisms of injury among this athlete population.
香京julia种子在线播放
Softball pitching is a highly asymmetric sport, with dominant and nondominant limbs performing drastically different motions (Fuchs et al.,
Altered functional characteristics, such as strength and range of motion (ROM) of major joints, due to high repetition are also widely reported in throwing literature. While altered functional characteristics can bring about necessary adaptations to benefit the athlete, research also shows that some adaptations that evoke drastic asymmetry, such as large bilateral deficits in shoulder internal ROM, may lead to an increased risk of injury (Scher et al.,
A particular body trait that might pose further threat to asymmetry is body composition. Body fat percentage (bf%) and body mass index have been linked with altered hip and shoulder ROM (Kettunen et al.,
Recent reports show that those pitchers who are injured most often are typically heavier, taller, and have a higher body mass index or bf% (Greenberg et al.,
A total of 41 high school female softball pitchers from the southern United States agreed to participate in the study (1.69 ± 0.07 m, 76.14 ± 17.08 kg, 15.1 ± 1.1 years,
Prior to participation, all participants were explained the study protocol and informed consent was signed by the participants' parent/guardian while the participant signed assent documentation. To be eligible for participation, pitchers needed to be injury- and surgery-free for the past 6 months and on a current softball roster. They also needed to have pitched in a game within the past 6 months and have reported to the laboratory fully rested for the previous 24 h.
All protocols were approved by the Institutional Review Board. Pitchers first completed a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) whole-body scan, which collected whole-body and segmental composition measurements, including fat tissue, lean tissue, and bone mineral content (GE Healthcare, Madison, WI, USA). The standard error of estimate for the DEXA is ±1.8%. Following the dual-energy X-ray measurement, pitchers' bilateral hip and shoulder ISO and ROM were assessed in both the IR and ER directions. Regarding the hips, the push hip was part of the leg that pushes the pitcher off the ground and the stride hip referred to the leg that made foot contact during the pitch (
Push and stride leg illustration during the windmill pitch.
A handheld dynamometer (Lafayette Instruments, Lafayette, IN, USA) and inclinometer (Fabrication Enterprises, Inc., White Plains, NY, USA) were used to measure ISO and ROM, respectively (Dwelly et al.,
Hip ER ROM measurement.
Hip ER ISO measurement.
In gathering shoulder measurements, participants lay supine on an athletic training table with their upper arm abducted 90° and their elbow flexed to 90°. Again, a rolled towel was placed under the distal humerus to ensure smooth shoulder movement. The tester used one hand to limit scapular movement while the other hand slowly rotated the forearm either in the direction of the feet (IR measurement) or in the direction of the head (ER measurement). End ROM was determined just prior to when the participants' scapula would lift off the table for IR and at firm capsular end feel for ER (
Shoulder IR ROM measurement.
Shoulder ER ISO measurement.
All statistical analyses were completed in SPSS software package (SPSS Statistics 26 Software, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Prior to statistical analyses, all data were checked for normality, linearity, and outliers (defined as those >2 SDs away from the mean). Data were considered normal and linear, with a few outliers present. Analyses were conducted with and without outliers to which no significant differences were observed; therefore, original data with outliers included were used for analyses. Levene's test for equality of variance was conducted and equal variance was consistently observed. Mixed analyses of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to assess the difference between bf% groups and side dominance on several variables, including shoulder and hip external and IR ROM and ISO. Two subsequent mixed ANOVAs were also used to assess arm bone mass and lean mass. Alpha level was set
Means and SDs for each variable are presented in
Means ± standard deviations for both pitcher groups' hip and shoulder ISO, ROM, and arm lean tissue and bone.
Hip IR ROM (°) | 30.4 ± 4.0 | 30.1 ± 3.4 | 27.3 ± 5.3 | 28.7 ± 4.6 |
Shoulder IR ROM |
40.7 ± 5.1a, b | 44.5 ± 4.2b | 44.8 ± 5.8a, c | 42.4 ± 6.8c |
Hip ER ROM (°) | 38.0 ± 4.0 | 38.1 ± 3.8 | 36.9 ± 4.6 | 36.3 ± 3.3 |
Shoulder ER ROM (°) | 100.6 ± 14.5 | 100.7 ± 15.1 | 94.7 ± 12.2 | 94.5 ± 17.0 |
Hip IR ISO |
178.2 ± 35.1 | 170.0 ± 42.8 | 188.3 ± 42.2 | 176.1 ± 43.4 |
Shoulder IR ISO (kgf) | 155.7 ± 18.3 | 155.9 ± 17.8 | 159.1 ± 24.2 | 154.9 ± 33.4 |
Hip ER ISO (kgf) | 136.5 ± 26.6 | 135.3 ± 23.6 | 138.7 ± 30.4 | 146.5 ± 33.9 |
Shoulder ER ISO |
168.0 ± 26.0 | 163.7 ± 23.8 | 186.1 ± 43.0 | 171.0 ± 47.0 |
Arm Lean Tissue (lbs) |
5.6 ± 1.0 | 5.0 ± 1.0 | 6.3 ± 1.0 | 5.7 ± 1.1 |
Arm Bone Tissue (lbs) |
0.4 ± 0.1 | 0.3 ± 0.1 | 0.4 ± 0.1 | 0.4 ± 0.1 |
The ANOVA assessing shoulder ER ISO was significant and revealed a main effect for side, F(1, 39) = 8.133,
Examination of bone and lean tissue of the dominant and nondominant arms revealed significant main effects for side dominance. The ANOVA examining bone reported F(1, 39) = 38.620,
The constant asymmetric motions associated with softball pitching and the additional risk for injury associated with body asymmetries (Shanley et al.,
The only functional characteristic to present differences according to bf% group was IR ROM of the shoulder, although it is important to note that these differences were smaller than the MDC calculated previously. Discussion of results should therefore be viewed with this in mind. Data revealed that pitchers with a healthy bf% had less dominant arm IR ROM than the high bf% group (albeit not of clinical significance). The difference between bf% groups suggests that the amount of body fat a pitcher possesses might have a slight influence on functional characteristic adaptations. Loss of IR ROM of the dominant shoulder is common among those athletes who regularly perform throwing tasks (Shanley et al.,
Data revealed that there were side-to-side asymmetries in IR ROM between the throwing and glove shoulders. Interestingly, the high bf% group displayed more IR ROM in their throwing shoulder compared to the glove shoulder, opposite of the healthy fat% group. While drastic shoulder asymmetries can lead to injury among throwers (Shanley et al.,
Notable side-to-side differences were observed in shoulder ER ISO and hip IR ISO. Based on the pitching motion, asymmetry in IR ISO of the shoulder was expected as another typical adaptation for throwers. During the windmill pitch, the throwing arm shoulder completes rapid IR during the acceleration phase of the pitch (Maffet et al.,
The final findings noted asymmetry in throwing arm lean tissue and bone for both groups of pitchers. As might be expected, bone and lean tissue was heavier within the throwing arm. As this did not vary between pitcher bf% groups, this again highlights the importance of other factors that might influence adaptation to functional characteristics. However, descriptive analysis of the mean and SD data reported in
While research notes that pitchers with increased bf% exhibit higher rates of pitching-related injury (Oliver et al.,
This study has some limitations. First, there are potential inconsistencies in maximum effort required during the ISO measurement, and similarly the consistency of the applied rater pressure to the device can vary given the handheld nature of the device. However, all participants were given the same instruction, “to push as hard as possible,” and the rater too gave maximal effort during each measurement. Second, the expertise and development of participants was not controlled; therefore, pitchers with various mechanics and pitching success rates might influence the aggregate data analysis. However, the recruitment sample did come from one general area of the southern United States; therefore, it might be assumed that these players were of a similar skill and competition level. Similarly, the study sample involved a relatively small age range, and it might be expected that older pitchers with more substantial bf% differences could present different and more substantial findings. It is also important to keep in mind that there were no drastic functional characteristic differences between the bf% groups, nor was there a significant number of other variables that differed between bf% groups. Finally, our functional characteristics were measured in static positions and will therefore be limited in their application of the dynamic pitching motion under consideration.
Data inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Auburn University Institutional Review Board. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants' legal guardian/next of kin.
KF and GO: study conception and design and data collection. KF, AL, KC, and GO: data analysis and interpretation, drafting manuscript, and critical revision. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
The authors thank the Sports Medicine and Movement Laboratory members for their assistance with data collection.