Background

Although restricted hip range of motion (ROM) is associated with an increased risk for injuries in baseball players, the evolution of hip ROM over the season remains undefined.

Hypothesis

Hip ROM profiles would be symmetric between hips and positions (pitchers vs position players) but would decrease from preseason to postseason. Additionally, it was hypothesized that this decrease in motion would correlate with workload.

Study design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods

Bilateral hip ROM was assessed in 96 professional baseball players (54 pitchers, 42 position players) preseason and postseason. ROM comparisons were made between lead and trailing hips, pitchers and position players, and preseason and postseason measures. The change from preseason to postseason was correlated with player demographics and measures of workload for pitchers and position players.

Results

Preseason hip ROM was symmetric between hips; however, pitchers demonstrated increased preseason lead hip internal rotation (IR) (P = .018) and bilateral hip total ROM (TROM) (P < .020) compared with position players. From preseason to postseason, position players lost 7° of external rotation (ER) (P ≤ .005 ). In pitchers, the loss of IR correlated with increased pitches (P = .016) and innings (P = .037), while the loss of ER (P = .005 ) and TROM (P = .014) correlated with increasing mean fastball velocity. Workload for position players did not correlate with motion loss.

Conclusion

Symmetric hip ROM profiles should be anticipated in baseball players; however, pitchers may have increased preseason IR and TROM and postseason ER and TROM relative to position players. Although loss of motion correlated with workload in pitchers, this was not the case for position players. Hip motion should be monitored over the course of the season. This is particularly true for pitchers who lose IR as workload increases, which may place them at a greater risk for injuries.

A stringent outcome assessment is a key aspect of establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury treatment. To establish a standardized assessment of clinical outcome after ACL treatment, a consensus meeting including a multidisciplinary group of ACL experts was held at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, in June 2019. The aim was to establish a consensus on what data should be reported when conducting an ACL outcome study, what specific outcome measurements should be used, and at what follow-up time those outcomes should be assessed. The group reached consensus on 9 statements by using a modified Delphi method. In general, outcomes after ACL treatment can be divided into 4 robust categories: early adverse events, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), ACL graft failure/recurrent ligament disruption, and clinical measures of knee function and structure. A comprehensive assessment after ACL treatment should aim to provide a complete overview of the treatment result, optimally including the various aspects of outcome categories. For most research questions, a minimum follow-up of 2 years with an optimal follow-up rate of 80% is necessary to achieve a comprehensive assessment. This should include clinical examination, any sustained reinjuries, validated knee-specific PROs, and health-related quality of life questionnaires. In the midterm to long-term follow-up, the presence of osteoarthritis should be evaluated. This consensus paper provides practical guidelines for how the aforementioned entities of outcomes should be reported and suggests the preferred tools for a reliable and valid assessment of outcome after ACL treatment.