Interval Throwing Programs for Baseball Players: Methodological Assessment of the Quality and Construct of Publicly Available Programs.

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Alexander M Boos, Namit Sambare, Matthew V Smith, Michael T Freehill, Eric N Bowman, Brandon J Erickson, Peter N Chalmers, Aaron Sciascia, Christopher L Camp
{"title":"Interval Throwing Programs for Baseball Players: Methodological Assessment of the Quality and Construct of Publicly Available Programs.","authors":"Alexander M Boos, Namit Sambare, Matthew V Smith, Michael T Freehill, Eric N Bowman, Brandon J Erickson, Peter N Chalmers, Aaron Sciascia, Christopher L Camp","doi":"10.1177/19417381241237011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>The quality and interprogram variability of publicly available throwing programs have not been assessed.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To (1) identify publicly available interval throwing programs, (2) describe their components and structure, and (3) evaluate their quality, variability, and completeness.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Google, Bing, Yahoo; keyword: \"interval throwing program.\"</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Baseball-specific publicly available programs.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Systematic review.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 4.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Independent evaluation by 2 authors using a novel 21-item Quality Assessment Rubric (QAR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 99 included programs, 54% were designed for return from injury/surgery; 42% explicitly stated no expected timeline for completion, and approximately 40% did not provide criteria to initiate the program. Program construction was highly variable. There were broad-ranging shortest (mean: 40±8 ft, range: 20-45 ft) and longest (mean: 150±33 ft, range: 90-250 ft) long toss distances, and variable maximum numbers of mound pitches thrown before returning to game play (range: 40-120, mean: 85). Only 63% of programs provided guidelines for handling setbacks, and standardized warm-ups, arm care, and concomitant training were absent in 32%, 63%, and 47% of programs, respectively. Mean QAR completion rate and QAR item response rate were low (62 ± 4% [range, 24-91%], 62 ± 24% [range, 7-99%], respectively). Finally, only 20 (20%) programs provided at least 1 peer-reviewed reference, most of which were published >10 years ago.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Publicly available interval throwing programs are readily available but demonstrate significant interprogram heterogeneity across multiple areas including target audience, program construction, progression, and execution. The quality and consistency of publicly available interval throwing programs is poor at this time, which may limit their utility and effectiveness for baseball players attempting to return to competition. This work identifies a multitude of deficiencies in currently available throwing programs that should be targets of future improvement efforts.</p>","PeriodicalId":54276,"journal":{"name":"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach","volume":" ","pages":"451-459"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11569571/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19417381241237011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: The quality and interprogram variability of publicly available throwing programs have not been assessed.

Objective: To (1) identify publicly available interval throwing programs, (2) describe their components and structure, and (3) evaluate their quality, variability, and completeness.

Data sources: Google, Bing, Yahoo; keyword: "interval throwing program."

Study selection: Baseball-specific publicly available programs.

Study design: Systematic review.

Level of evidence: Level 4.

Data extraction: Independent evaluation by 2 authors using a novel 21-item Quality Assessment Rubric (QAR).

Results: Of the 99 included programs, 54% were designed for return from injury/surgery; 42% explicitly stated no expected timeline for completion, and approximately 40% did not provide criteria to initiate the program. Program construction was highly variable. There were broad-ranging shortest (mean: 40±8 ft, range: 20-45 ft) and longest (mean: 150±33 ft, range: 90-250 ft) long toss distances, and variable maximum numbers of mound pitches thrown before returning to game play (range: 40-120, mean: 85). Only 63% of programs provided guidelines for handling setbacks, and standardized warm-ups, arm care, and concomitant training were absent in 32%, 63%, and 47% of programs, respectively. Mean QAR completion rate and QAR item response rate were low (62 ± 4% [range, 24-91%], 62 ± 24% [range, 7-99%], respectively). Finally, only 20 (20%) programs provided at least 1 peer-reviewed reference, most of which were published >10 years ago.

Conclusion: Publicly available interval throwing programs are readily available but demonstrate significant interprogram heterogeneity across multiple areas including target audience, program construction, progression, and execution. The quality and consistency of publicly available interval throwing programs is poor at this time, which may limit their utility and effectiveness for baseball players attempting to return to competition. This work identifies a multitude of deficiencies in currently available throwing programs that should be targets of future improvement efforts.

棒球运动员间歇投掷计划:对公开项目的质量和结构进行方法评估。
背景:尚未对公开的投掷项目的质量和项目间的可变性进行评估:数据来源:Google、Bing、Yahoo;关键词:"间歇投掷项目":数据来源:谷歌、必应、雅虎;关键词:"间歇投掷项目":研究设计:系统综述:系统综述:数据提取数据提取:由两名作者使用新颖的 21 项质量评估标准(QAR)进行独立评估:结果:在纳入的 99 项计划中,54% 的计划是为伤愈/手术后的恢复而设计的;42% 的计划明确说明没有预期的完成时间,约 40% 的计划没有提供启动计划的标准。计划的结构差异很大。最短(平均值:40±8 英尺,范围:20-45 英尺)和最长(平均值:150±33 英尺,范围:90-250 英尺)的掷远距离以及恢复比赛前的最大掷球数(范围:40-120 次,平均值:85 次)各不相同。只有 63% 的计划提供了处理挫折的指南,32%、63% 和 47% 的计划分别缺乏标准化的热身、手臂护理和伴随训练。平均 QAR 完成率和 QAR 项目回复率较低(分别为 62 ± 4% [范围:24-91%]、62 ± 24% [范围:7-99%])。最后,只有 20 个(20%)项目提供了至少 1 篇同行评议参考文献,其中大部分发表于 10 年前:结论:公开的间歇性投掷项目很容易获得,但在目标受众、项目构建、进展和执行等多个方面,项目间存在显著的不一致性。目前,公开发行的间歇投掷训练计划的质量和一致性都很差,这可能会限制其对试图重返赛场的棒球运动员的实用性和有效性。这项研究发现了目前可用的投掷训练计划中存在的诸多不足,这些不足应成为未来改进工作的目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach
Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
101
期刊介绍: Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach is an indispensable resource for all medical professionals involved in the training and care of the competitive or recreational athlete, including primary care physicians, orthopaedic surgeons, physical therapists, athletic trainers and other medical and health care professionals. Published bimonthly, Sports Health is a collaborative publication from the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM), the National Athletic Trainers’ Association (NATA), and the Sports Physical Therapy Section (SPTS). The journal publishes review articles, original research articles, case studies, images, short updates, legal briefs, editorials, and letters to the editor. Topics include: -Sports Injury and Treatment -Care of the Athlete -Athlete Rehabilitation -Medical Issues in the Athlete -Surgical Techniques in Sports Medicine -Case Studies in Sports Medicine -Images in Sports Medicine -Legal Issues -Pediatric Athletes -General Sports Trauma -Sports Psychology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信