Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “throwing”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2000

Effects of throwing overweight and underweight baseballs on throwing velocity and accuracy.

The purpose of this review is to determine how throwing overweight and underweight baseballs affects baseball throwing velocity and accuracy. Two studies examined how a warm-up with overweight baseballs affected throwing velocity and accuracy of 5 oz regulation baseballs. One of these studies showed significant increases in throwing velocity and accuracy, while the other study found no significant differences. Three training studies (6 to 12 weeks in duration) using overweight baseballs were conducted to determine how they affected ball accuracy while throwing regulation baseballs. No significant differences were found in any study. From these data it is concluded that warming up or training with overweight baseballs does not improve ball accuracy. Seven overweight and 4 underweight training studies (6 to 12 weeks in duration) were conducted to determine how throwing velocity of regulation baseballs was affected due to training with these overweight and underweight baseballs. The overweight baseballs ranged in weight from 5.25 to 17 oz, while the underweight baseballs were between 4 and 4.75 oz. Data from these training studies strongly support the practice of training with overweight and underweight baseballs to increase throwing velocity of regulation baseballs. Since no injuries were reported throughout the training studies, throwing overweight and underweight baseballs may not be more stressful to the throwing arm compared to throwing regulation baseballs. However, since currently there are no injury data related to throwing overweight and underweight baseballs, this should be the focus of subsequent studies. In addition, research should be initiated to determine whether throwing kinematics and kinetics are different between throwing regulation baseballs and throwing overweight and underweight baseballs.

Animals↗
PubMed1998

Variability in development of overarm throwing: a longitudinal case study over the first 6 months of throwing.

One female subject of 15 months of age, at the onset of over-arm-throwing behaviour, was tested on a longitudinal study of throwing development. Data were collected at the onset of throwing and monthly thereafter, producing 6 sets of data. Kinematic variables were obtained using 3-dimensional video analysis and digitization. Qualitative observations showed that both arm-dominated and sequentially linked throws, right- and left-handed throws, and homolateral and contralateral forward steps were generated in an array of inconsistent throwing. Sequentially linked throws were generally 'interrupted', whereby the child paused briefly after the Back swing to focus externally, then the child executed the propulsion. The throwing elbow remained flexed at ball release. Angles of ball release (referred to the horizontal) fluctuated from 2.17 degrees to 28.03 degrees for all 6 months of throwing development, and the speed of ball release varied from 2.08 m/sec. to 4.32 m/sec. Height of ball release oscillated between 91.5% and 103.3% of the child's height. Horizontal and vertical components of the velocity of the ball while in the hand differed amongst both arm-dominated and sequentially linked throws. The time of the Push up phase in arm-dominated throws varied from 0.14 sec. to 0.50 sec. In sequentially linked throws the time of the Back swing ranged from 0.18 sec. to 0.22 sec., and the Propulsion varied from 0.06 sec. to 0.14 sec. This work in identifying such variability is important, therefore, in the understanding of the motor skill of throwing.

Arm↗
PubMed1996

Throwing while looking through prisms. II. Specificity and storage of multiple gaze-throw calibrations.

Human subjects threw balls of clay at a visual target while looking through wedge prism spectacles. In studies of short-term adjustment, subjects threw in the direction of their prism-bent gaze, missing the target to that side. Within 10-30 throws, they gradually adapted with a wider gaze-throw angle and hit the target. Immediately after removal of the prisms the wide gaze-throw angle persisted and throws missed the target to the opposite side, the so-called 'negative after effect'. Repeated throws were required to adapt back to the normal gaze-throw angle and hit the target. The adaptation was specific both to the body parts trained and the type of throw trained: training with the right hand did not generalize to throwing with the left; overhand training seldom generalized to underhand throwing. In a study of long-term adjustment, two subjects threw with the same hand (right) and the same type of throw (overhand) alternately, with and without prisms, over a period of 6 weeks. They gradually learned to hit the target on the first throw, with and without prisms. The two gaze-throw calibrations (prism and no-prism) were retained for > 27 months. The long-term adjustment was shown to consist of a coordinated relationship of eye-in-head, head-on-trunk and trunk-on-arm angles.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Throwing accuracy during prism adaptation: male advantage for throwing accuracy is independent of prism adaptation rate.

Previous studies have found that men are more accurate at throwing an object at a target than are women, independent of experience. However, these studies' results are based on average scores from multiple trials. As such, it is unknown whether the male advantage results from superior throwing accuracy or from a superior ability to calibrate subsequent throws. This study examined whether men can calibrate repeated throws more quickly and accurately than women, 25 men and 30 women were required to throw velcro-covered balls at a carpet-covered target, both with and without 10-diopter prism lenses. Participants had multiple trials in both conditions. Analyses examined whether there was a sex difference in the rate of adaptation to the prism lenses (as indicated by calibration of subsequent throws), instead of simply averaging all throwing accuracy scores and looking for an overall sex difference. Men threw the balls significantly more accurately than women, both with and without the prism lenses. However, there was no significant sex difference found on the rate of prism adaptation, as measured by improvement across the trials, i.e., calibration. Although men were more accurate at throwing balls overall, there was no sex difference in calibration of subsequent throws in adapting to the prism lenses, therefore indicating that the male advantage in throwing accuracy does not result from superior ability to calibrate subsequent throws but rather from superior throwing accuracy overall.

Accommodation, Ocular↗
PubMed2001

Predicting children's overarm throw ball velocities from their developmental levels in throwing.

This study examined the movement process-product relationship from a developmental perspective. The authors used multiple regression to investigate the changing relationship between qualitative movement descriptions of the overarm throw and the throwing outcome, horizontal ball velocity. Seventeen girls and 22 boys were filmed longitudinally at ages 6, 7, 8, and 13 years. Their movements were assessed using Roberton's (Roberton & Halverson, 1984) developmental sequences for action of the humerus, forearm, trunk, stepping, and stride length. The sequences accounted for 69-85% (adjusted) of the total velocity variance each year. The components that best predicted ball velocity changed over time, although humerus or forearm action always accounted for considerable variance. Gender was a good predictor of ball velocity, but if the developmental descriptions were entered first in a stepwise regression, gender then explained no more than 2% additional variance.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Posterior shoulder pain in throwing athletes with a Bennett lesion: factors that influence throwing pain.

A Bennett lesion is a bony spur at the posterior glenoid that is often seen in baseball players and usually asymptomatic. However, it sometimes becomes painful, but the mechanism of throwing pain is still unknown. The purposes of this study were to identify clinical characteristics associated with the Bennett lesion causing shoulder pain (painful Bennett lesion) and to try to predict which type of Bennett lesion might become painful. Several clinical factors in 51 consecutive baseball players who underwent arthroscopic surgery were investigated. Of these baseball players, 24 had a bony spur: 13 were diagnosed as having a painful Bennett lesion and 11 were diagnosed as having an asymptomatic Bennett lesion, according to our previously reported criteria. The other 27 players did not have a bony spur. Posterior joint laxity, no deficit of internal rotation, and an avulsed fragment on computed tomography scan were determined to be the characteristic clinical features in the shoulders with a painful Bennett lesion.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

A comparative study of aimed throwing by monkeys and humans.

This research examined hand preference and postural characteristics of aimed throwing in capuchin monkeys and humans. We sought to directly compare the throwing performances of these primates, particularly the extent to which target distance influences hand preference, throwing posture, and throwing accuracy. For both species we found positive correlations between target distances for throwing accuracy, direction and strength of hand preference, percentage of bipedal vs tripedal throws, and percentage of overarm vs underarm throws. Throwing accuracy did not vary as a function of right vs left hand use although for monkeys throwing accuracy was positively associated with hand preference strength. We noted a sex difference among humans as males threw more accurately than did females. Between-species analysis indicated that humans exhibited greater right- vs left-hand use, greater hand preference strength, a greater relative percentage of bipedal vs tripedal throws, and a lower relative percentage of overarm vs underarm throws than did monkeys. We believe that the capuchin monkey is an informative nonhuman primate model of aimed throwing in humans and that research examining the throwing behavior of capuchins provides insight into the neurological and behavioral characteristics that underlie coordinated multi-joint movements across the primate order.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Control of joint rotations in overarm throws of different speeds made by dominant and nondominant arms.

We tested the hypothesis that dominant and nondominant overarm throws of different speeds are made by time-scaling of joint rotations, i.e., by joint rotations that have the same positions and amplitudes but that are scaled in time. Eight skilled subjects stood and made overarm throws with both their dominant and nondominant arms. Six joint rotations were computed from recordings of arm segments made with the search-coil technique. Throws made with nondominant arms were less accurate and had lower ball speeds. In contrast to the hypothesis, dominant arms showed large and consistent differences between fast and slow throws in six-dimensional angular position joint space. These same throws showed similar hand angular paths when these were time-scaled based on ball speed. Nondominant arms showed only small differences in angular position joint space in fast and slow throws. It is concluded that a joint space pattern resembling that predicted by time-scaling occurs in nondominant arm throwing when it is unskilled. However, time-scaling does not occur in dominant arm throwing, i.e., a skilled fast throw is not simply a skilled slow throw whose joint positions and amplitudes remain constant but whose joint velocities are sped-up. We hypothesize for future study that, when subjects first learn to throw at different speeds with their dominant arms, they use time-scaling of joint rotations that involves compensating for interaction torques; then as they become skilled at throwing fast, time-scaling is superseded by a more complex pattern of interjoint coordination that involves exploiting interaction torques.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Overarm throws with the nondominant arm: kinematics of accuracy.

1. Overarm throws made with the nondominant arm are usually less accurate than those made with the dominant arm. The objective was to determine the errors in the joint rotations associated with this inaccuracy, and thereby to gain insight into the neural mechanisms that contribute to skill in overarm throwing. 2. Overarm throws from both left and right arms were recorded on different occasions as six right-handed subjects sat with a fixed trunk and threw 150 tennis balls at about the same speed at a 6-cm square on a target grid 3 m away. Joint rotations at the shoulder, elbow, wrist, and finger, and arm translations, were computed from recordings of arm segment orientations made with the magnetic-field search-coil technique. 3. All subjects threw less accurately in this task with the left (nondominant) arm. For throws made with the left arm, the height of ball impact on the target grid was related to hand trajectory length and to hand orientation in space at ball release, but not to hand trajectory height. 4. Two hypotheses were proposed to explain the decreased ball accuracy in the high-low direction during throwing with the nondominant arm: that it was caused by increased variability in the velocity or timing of onset of rotations at proximal joints (which determine the path of the hand through space) or increased variability in the velocity or timing of onset of finger extension (which determine the moment of ball release). 5. A prediction of the first hypothesis was that proximal joint rotations should be more variable in throws with the left arm. This was the case for the majority of proximal joint rotations in the six subjects when variability was examined in joint space. However, some proximal joint rotations were more variable in the right arm. 6. The first hypothesis was directly tested by determining whether hand angular position in space (which represents the sum of all proximal joint rotations) was related to ball impact height on the target grid at a fixed translational position in the throw. No relation was found between these variables for throws with the left arm in four subjects, whereas a weak relation was found for two subjects. It was concluded that, considering all subjects, the first hypothesis could not explain the results. 7. In contrast, in agreement with the second hypothesis, a strong relation (P < 0.001) was found in all subjects between ball impact height on the target grid and time of ball release for throws with the left arm, and with time of onset of finger extension. 8. Across all six subjects the timing precision (windows) for 95% of the throws was (for ball release) right arm, 9.3 ms; left arm, 22.5 ms; (for onset of finger extension) right arm, 13.7 ms; left arm, 26.7 ms. 9. Timing of onset of finger extension was no less accurate than timing of onset of other joint rotations for both left and right arms. However, simulations of throws showed that, for the same error in timing, finger extension had twice as large an effect on ball direction as any other joint rotation. Timing errors at the fingers have a greater effect than errors at other joints because finger errors are scaled by the higher angular velocity of the hand in space rather than by the smaller angular velocities of the individual joints. 10. It is concluded that although rotations were in general more variable at both proximal and distal joints of the nondominant (left) arm, the major cause of its decreased throwing accuracy was increased variability at the distal joints, i.e., in the timing of onset of finger extension. This may be due to a lack of precision in the commands from the right hemisphere to the left fingers in right-handed throwers.

Arm↗
PubMed1999

Prediction and compensation by an internal model for back forces during finger opening in an overarm throw.

Previous studies have indicated that timing of finger opening in an overarm throw is likely controlled centrally, possibly by means of an internal model of hand trajectory. The present objective was to extend the study of throwing to an examination of the dynamics of finger opening. Throwing a heavy ball and throwing a light ball presumably require different neural commands, because the weight of the ball affects the mechanics of the arm, and particularly, the mechanics of the finger. Yet finger control is critical to the accuracy of an overarm throw. We hypothesized that finger opening in an overarm throw is controlled by a central mechanism that uses an internal model to predict and compensate for movement-dependent back forces on the fingers. To test this idea we determined whether finger motion is affected by back forces, i.e., whether larger back forces cause larger finger extensions. Back forces were varied by having subjects throw, at the same fast speed, tennis-sized balls of different weights (14, 55, and 196 g). Arm- and finger-joint rotations were recorded with the search-coil technique; forces on the middle finger were measured with force transducers. Recordings showed that during ball release, the middle finger experienced larger back forces in throws with heavier balls. Nevertheless, most subjects showed proximal interphalangeal joint extensions that were unchanged or actually smaller with the heavier balls. This was the case for the first throw and for all subsequent throws with a ball of a new weight. This suggests that the finger flexors compensated for the larger back forces by exerting larger torques during finger extension. Supporting this view, at the moment of ball release, all finger joints flexed abruptly due to the now unopposed torques of the finger flexors, and the amplitude of this flexion was proportional to ball weight. We conclude that in overarm throws made with balls of different weights, the CNS predicts the different back forces from the balls and adjusts finger flexor torques accordingly. This is consistent with the view that finger opening in overarm throws is controlled by means of an internal model of the motor apparatus and the external load.

Adaptation, Physiological↗
PubMed2003

Kinematics of wrist joint flexion in overarm throws made by skilled subjects.

Previous studies of multijoint arm movements have shown that the CNS holds arm kinematics constant in different situations by predictively compensating for the effects of interaction torques. We determined whether this was also the case for wrist joint flexion in natural overarm throws performed by skilled subjects in 3D, a situation where large passive torques can occur at the wrist. Specifically, we investigated whether wrist flexion amplitudes are held constant in throws of different speeds. Joint rotations were recorded at 1,000 Hz with the search-coil technique. Contrary to a previous study on constrained 2D throwing, indirect evidence was found that in fast throws passive torques associated with forearm deceleration were exploited to increase wrist flexion velocity. This increase in wrist flexion velocity was associated with constant wrist flexion amplitudes at ball release (mean 27 degrees) for throws of different speeds. Furthermore, final wrist flexion positions after ball release were similar for a particular subject irrespective of the speed of the throw. This was associated in faster throws with increased magnitudes of wrist flexor and wrist extensor EMG activity which damped passive torques associated with forearm angular deceleration. It is concluded that wrist flexion in overarm throws of different speeds is produced by central signals which precisely control net joint torque by both exploiting and damping passive torques during different parts of the throw to keep wrist joint angular position parameters constant. As such the results show that control strategies for natural 3D throwing are different from those for constrained 2D throwing.

Arm↗
PubMed2005

Timing finger opening in overarm throwing based on a spatial representation of hand path.

Previous studies on overarm throwing have suggested that throwing accuracy depends on a precise central timing mechanism. In the present study, we investigated an alternative hypothesis: that central control of finger opening is based on an internal positional representation of handpath. Angular positions of each segment of the middle finger, thumb, and arm were recorded with the search-coil technique as subjects made slow, medium, and fast throws at a target 3.1 m away. Onset of ball release from the hand was strongly correlated with extension at the proximal interphalangeal joint (PIJ). The velocity of this finger joint opening varied with the speed of the throw. In agreement with the hypothesis, at a fixed hand angular position in space, there was no difference across subjects in the amplitude of extension at the PIJ for throws of different speeds. That is, for these two parameters, a fast throw was the same as a slow throw that was sped-up. This occurred irrespective of whether the trunk was constrained (sitting throws) or unconstrained (standing throws). No equivalent relation was found between extension at the PIJ and elbow extension. These findings support the idea that precisely timed finger opening in overarm throwing depends, not on a central timing controller that triggers a step-like (ballistic) finger opening at the right moment in throws of different speeds, but on a central spatial controller that matches angular positions of finger opening to the intended handpath.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

The effect of number of throws on knot security with nonidentical sliding knots.

OBJECTIVE: The study was undertaken to test the integrity of nonidentical sliding knots made with 3 throws compared with those made with 6 throws with monofilament and braided absorbable suture. STUDY DESIGN: The 3 throw nonidentical sliding knot was compared with the 6 throw nonidentical sliding knot in 4 different suture groups. The groups were 0-0 polydioxanone, 2-0 polydioxanone, 0-0 polyglactin 910, and 2-0 polyglactin 910. Knots were tested to failure with a tensiometer. The proportion of 3 throw knots becoming untied was compared with the 6 throw knot within each group. Ultimate load required to break tied knots within each suture group was also evaluated. RESULTS: The 3 throw knots had very high rates of knot failure and untied significantly more often than the 6 throw knots. CONCLUSION: The 6 throw nonidentical sliding knot demonstrates superior knot integrity compared with the 3 throw knot with both monofilament and braided absorbable suture.

Female↗
PubMed1994

Arm position constraints when throwing in three dimensions.

1. Overarm throwing is a skilled multijoint movement with potentially many degrees of freedom. Considering only the arm > or = 7 degrees of freedom are involved (shoulder 3, elbow 2, wrist 2). For each arm segment 3 degrees of freedom are potentially required to specify its angular position (orientation) at any moment during a throw. Simplification of the control problem for the CNS would occur if there were constraints on these degrees of freedom. The objective was to determine whether such constraints exist at ball release when throwing at targets in different directions using only the arm. 2. The angular positions in three dimensions of the distal phalanx of the middle finger, the hand, the forearm, and the upper arm were simultaneously recorded with search coils as subjects sat with a fixed trunk and threw balls at nine targets in an approximate +/- 40 degree work space. Ball release was signaled by microswitches on the proximal and distal phalanges of the middle finger (proximal and distal triggers). 3. On throwing at any one target the hand at ball release adopted a similar orientation for each throw, i.e., for a particular vertical and horizontal angular position the hand adopted a similar torsional position. On throwing at targets throughout the work space, angular position (rotation) vectors describing hand positions in space at ball release were confined to a two-dimensional surface rather than a three-dimensional volume. This constraint in hand torsion occurred near and at ball release but not throughout the entire throw. It was not due to mechanical factors because such a surface was not obtained when subjects deliberately twisted their arms when throwing. Thus at ball release during a "natural" throw the hand was constrained to 2 of its possible 3 angular degrees of freedom. 4. The same constraint was also found for finger, forearm, and upper arm angular positions in space at ball release as determined at both the proximal and distal triggers. A consequence is that at ball release the entire arm was constrained to 2 of its possible 7 degrees of freedom. 5. The two-dimensional position vector surface for each arm segment was similar to that obtained when pointing with a straight arm at the same targets. In both cases they showed torsion and were twisted like the surface obtained by rotations around the horizontal and vertical axes of a Fick gimbal. However, in some subjects the throwing surfaces were tilted from the vertical.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Errors in the control of joint rotations associated with inaccuracies in overarm throws.

1. Accurate overarm throwing requires precise control of joint rotations so that the ball is released at the appropriate time on the appropriate hand trajectory. Inaccuracy in throws, in turn, must result from errors in the control of joint rotations. But do high and low throws result from disorders in the joint rotations that produce the hand trajectory or in those that cause ball release? Are they due to error at a particular joint or to accumulation of errors across a number of joints? The objective was to answer these questions and thereby to gain insight into the CNS control of joint rotations in a skilled arm movement task. 2. Ten subjects--male, right-handed recreational ball players, all accurate throwers--sat with a fixed trunk and threw tennis balls at a 9 x 9 grid of 6-cm target squares 1.5 or 3 m away. Rotations of five arm segments in three dimensions were measured at 1,000 Hz with the magnetic-field search-coil technique. Hand trajectory (translation) was computed from these rotations. 3. The cause of ball high-low inaccuracy was investigated by determining its relation with hand kinematic parameters that could potentially affect it. No statistically significant relation was found between height of ball impact on the target and height of the hand trajectory. In contrast, statistically significant relations appeared between height of ball impact on the target and both hand trajectory length at ball release (for 8 of 10 subjects) and finger and hand orientation in space at ball release (for all 10 subjects). 4. Three hypotheses were proposed to explain the variable finger and hand orientations in space at ball release, i.e., that they resulted from errors in velocity of rotation at one or more proximal joints (wrist, elbow, shoulder), timing of onset of rotation at one or more proximal joints, or timing of ball release (due to incorrect velocity or timing of onset of finger opening). All three mechanisms could result in inappropriate finger and hand orientations in space at ball release, but the pattern of joint space trajectories would be different in each case. 5. High and low throws did not follow the joint space paths predicted by the first two hypotheses. Instead, as predicted by the third hypothesis, a separation of traces occurred when finger extension was plotted against wrist flexion or against elbow extension, e.g., for a given amplitude of wrist flexion, finger extension was large for the high throws and small for the low throws. 6. In agreement, when all throws were considered, a statistically significant (P < 0.005) relation was found between ball impact height on the target and the amplitude of finger extension, for a fixed amplitude of wrist flexion (10 subjects), and for a fixed amplitude of elbow extension (8 subjects). Only two subjects showed a statistically significant relation between ball impact height and the amplitude of wrist flexion, for a fixed amplitude of elbow extension. 7. The separation of finger extension-wrist flexion traces in joint space for high and low throws was due to a difference in the timing of onset of finger rotation with respect to the wrist rather than to an inappropriate velocity of the finger (or the wrist). 8. As expected, all 10 subjects showed statistically significant relations between the time of onset of finger extension and both finger orientation in space at ball release and height of ball impact on the target. 9. It is concluded that in fast arm-only throws made by male recreational ball players, high and low throws do not primarily result from variability in the height of the hand trajectory or from variability in the amplitude of one or more proximal joints due to errors in the velocity or timing of onset of these joint rotations. Instead, in most cases, they result from inappropriate timing of onset of rotation of the fingers with respect to the rotations of the other joints and thus to inappropriate timing of ball release. These findings emphasize the im

Arm↗