The Effect Of Three Techniques For Soft Tissue Mobilization On Softball Pitching Biomechanics

Document Type

Conference Presentation

Department

Health, Exercise, and Sport Sciences Department

Conference Title

American College of Sports Medicine - Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise conference

Organization

American College of Sports Medicine

Location

Virtual

Date of Presentation

8-1-2021

Journal Publication

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

ISSN

0195-9131

DOI

10.1249/01.mss.0000760608.80902.e8

Volume

53

Issue

8S

First Page

127

Abstract

Soft tissue mobilization (STM) is commonly performed by athletic trainers in collegiate sports; it can be implemented in a variety of ways. How different STM techniques influence subsequent biomechanical function is unexamined. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of various STM techniques on windmill pitching kinematics in collegiate softball. METHODS: 10 Division 1 softball pitchers underwent 4 testing periods involving an STM session followed by mechanical evaluation of a windmill pitch using a Proteus device (Proteus Motion, USA). The different STM options were: active release technique (ART), cupping therapy (CT), instrumented-assisted mobilization (IAM), and a comparison group receiving no treatment (control). The STM methods were conducted in a random order with 48 hours separating each test. Immediately after STM, players performed 8 maximal-effort windmill pitches on Proteus (3 acclimation repetitions followed by 5 analyzed pitches). Proteus calculated power (watts), explosiveness (watts/sec), endurance (percent maintenance of power in serial repetitions), range of motion (ROM; distance traveled in 3D space), and consistency (replication of range of motion). Repeated measures ANOVAs evaluated differences in Proteus outputs in the different STM trials. RESULTS: Subjects were 19.4 ± 1.1 years old, height was 64.5 ± 5.5in, weight was 150.4 ± 15.3 lb, arm length was 67.1 ± 3.4in, and mean pitching experience was 5.2 ± 4.3 years. Proteus performances following the control treatment were: power of 30.8 ± 2.9, explosiveness of 27.3 ± 8.3, endurance of 90.4 ± 4.7, ROM of 6.4 ± 1.0, and consistency of 80.3 ± 10.5. ANOVA demonstrated non-significant patterns (p > 0.150 compared to control) in which the ART testing had the highest subsequent power (32.5 ± 4.2), explosiveness (29.2 ± 7.9), and consistency (81.0 ± 12.8), and IAM had the highest endurance (92.9 ± 3.7). CONCLUSIONS: In a small, pilot sample of 10 softball pitchers, no STM method emerged as superior to the others or to the control group. Being the first investigation of its kind, further analyses on larger samples and in diverse athletic contexts are warranted to identify possible performance aids available to athletic trainers.

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS