Baseball and Softball Pitchers are Distinct Within-Subject Controlled Models for Exploring Proximal Femur Adaptation to Physical Activity
Within-subject controlled models in individuals who preferentially load one side of the body enable efficient exploration of the skeletal benefits of physical activity. There is no established model of physical activity-induced side-to-side differences (i.e., asymmetry) at the proximal femur. Proximal femur asymmetry was assessed via dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in male jumping athletes (JMP, n = 16), male baseball pitchers (BB, n = 21), female fast-pitch softball pitchers (SB, n = 22), and controls (CON, n = 42). The jumping leg was the dominant leg in JMP, whereas in BB, SB and CON the dominant leg was contralateral to the dominant/throwing arm. BB and SB had 5.5% (95% CI 3.9–7.0%) and 6.5% (95% CI 4.8–8.2%) dominant-to-nondominant leg differences for total hip areal bone mineral density (aBMD), with the asymmetry being greater than both CON and JMP (p < 0.05). BB and SB also possessed dominant-to-nondominant leg differences in femoral neck and trochanteric aBMD (p < 0.001). SB had 9.7% (95% CI 6.4–13.0%) dominant-to-nondominant leg differences in femoral neck bone mineral content, which was larger than any other group (p ≤ 0.006). At the narrow neck, SB had large (> 8%) dominant-to-nondominant leg differences in cross-sectional area, cross-sectional moment of inertia and section modulus, which were larger than any other group (p ≤ 0.02). Male baseball and female softball pitchers are distinct within-subject controlled models for exploring adaptation of the proximal femur to physical activity. They exhibit adaptation in their dominant/landing leg (i.e., leg contralateral to the throwing arm), but the pattern differs with softball pitchers exhibiting greater femoral neck adaptation.
KeywordsDXA Exercise Femoral neck Hip Osteoporosis
This contribution was made possible by support from the National Institutes of Health (R01 AR057740 and P30 AR072581).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
Robyn K. Fuchs, William R. Thompson, Alyssa M. Weatherholt, and Stuart J. Warden have no conflicts of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Indiana University and written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
- 3.Weaver CM, Gordon CM, Janz KF, Kalkwarf HJ, Lappe JM, Lewis R, O’Karma M, Wallace TC, Zemel BS (2016) The National Osteoporosis Foundation’s position statement on peak bone mass development and lifestyle factors: a systematic review and implementation recommendations. Osteoporos Int 27:1281–1386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Ireland A, Korhonen M, Heinonen A, Suominen H, Baur C, Stevens S, Degens H, Rittweger J (2011) Side-to-side differences in bone strength in master jumpers and sprinters. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact 11:298–305Google Scholar
- 20.Young KC, Sherk VD, Bemben DA (2011) Inter-limb musculoskeletal differences in competitive ten-pin bowlers: a preliminary analysis. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact 11:21–26Google Scholar
- 21.Coh M, Supej M (2008) Biomechanical model of the take-off action in the high jump: a case study. New Stud Athlet 23:63–73Google Scholar
- 24.Kageyama M, Sugiyama T, Kanehisa H, Maeda A (2015) Difference between adolescent and collegiate baseball pitchers in the kinematics and kinetics of the lower limbs and trunk during pitching motion. J Sports Sci Med 14:246–255Google Scholar
- 35.Chang JH, Tseng WM, Tseng JS, Huang SL (2008) Ground reaction force analysis of softball windmill pitch. In: Kwon YH, Shim J, Shim JK, Shin IS (eds) International Conference on Biomechanics in Sport, p 685Google Scholar
- 36.Huang CF, Wang LI, Chien CJ (2001) Characteristic ground reaction forces in softball pitching. In: Blackwell JR, Sanders RH (eds) International Symposium on Biomechanics in Sport, pp 104–107Google Scholar