A Comprehensive Biomechanical and Clinical Analysis of a Youth Ambidextrous Baseball Pitcher: A Case Report.
Sarah L Woelfel, Dimitri D Haan, Cameron B Jensen and 4 others
PMID 40620405WHAT IT FOUND
One youth ambidextrous pitcher’s shoulder motion and throwing mechanics changed differently on each side over three years.
Right-arm strength and speed improved, while left-arm motion lagged. This describes one athlete’s development, not evidence that any treatment works.
Key findings
01Shoulder total arc of motion decreased in both arms over three years, with the left arm dropping 28 degrees at the final check, bringing it close to a previously noted injury-risk threshold.
02Biomechanical changes were not equal between arms; right-arm shoulder distraction force and ball velocity increased substantially, while left-arm shoulder external rotation and horizontal abduction showed different patterns of change.
03The authors state these findings cannot be generalized and that cause and effect cannot be determined from this single case.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This is a single case report, so the findings cannot be generalized to other ambidextrous pitchers. The athlete’s training and throwing workload were not strictly controlled or fully tracked. Normative data used for comparison comes primarily from pitchers who throw with only one arm, which may not accurately reflect the demands on an ambidextrous athlete. Changes observed may be due to normal growth and maturation rather than any specific training effect. No cause-and-effect conclusions can be drawn about the impact of any intervention or natural development on injury risk.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The study was reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the changes in this one athlete’s mechanics or range of motion as evidence that a specific training program works or that certain deficits predict injury. This is a descriptive case of natural development and training exposure in a single person, not a controlled trial.