Langhans Mark T, Boos Alexander M, Iyer Sanathan, Simon Karissa N, Cherny Chad E, Johnson Andrew J, Zajac John M, Christoffer Daniel J, Hellem Aaron R, Finck Adam N, Camp Christopher L
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Maine.
Sports Health. 2025 Apr 29:19417381251333402. doi: 10.1177/19417381251333402.
There is need for an up-to-date comprehensive review of baseball interval throwing programs in the literature.
To (1) understand the origin and basis of interval throwing programs; (2) evaluate the content of programs in the peer-reviewed literature including target audience, initiation criteria, throwing specifics, arm care, and performance evaluation metrics; (3) classify these variables as well defined, ambiguous, or missing; and (4) analyze variability in key aspects including starting criteria, length, progression, and completion criteria.
Medline, Embase, Cochrane Reviews, Web of Science, and ScopusStudy Selection:The full text of studies, in English, had to be available. Included studies had to contain a complete interval throwing program designed for baseball players.
Systematic review.
Level 4.
Initial screening was conducted based on article title and abstract. Full text of the remaining articles was evaluated for fulfillment of inclusion criteria.
Nine studies initially met inclusion criteria. The programs' comprehensiveness was poor, with a mean Interval Throwing Program Checklist score of 20 (range 14-23) on a scale of 0 to 30. There were a variety of components, including progressive long toss, weighted ball, and throwing mechanics exercises. The programs identified had significant heterogeneity in duration, intensity, progression, and focus. Overall, there was a significant lack of attempts at validation or formal study of efficacy for published throwing programs.
Current published interval throwing programs are mostly variations of an original program published many years ago and were based on principles of progressive loading with pain as sign of injury that should be monitored carefully. However, these programs have minimal clinical validation and objective measures to quantify their effectiveness. This work identifies several limitations in the current literature and can serve as a foundation for future development of evidence-based interval throwing programs.
目前需要对文献中关于棒球间歇投球训练计划进行最新的全面综述。
（1）了解间歇投球训练计划的起源和基础；（2）评估同行评审文献中训练计划的内容，包括目标受众、起始标准、投球细节、手臂护理和性能评估指标；（3）将这些变量分类为定义明确、模糊或缺失；（4）分析关键方面的变异性，包括起始标准、时长、进展和完成标准。
Medline、Embase、Cochrane综述、科学网和Scopus
研究全文必须为英文。纳入的研究必须包含为棒球运动员设计的完整间歇投球训练计划。
系统综述。
4级。
基于文章标题和摘要进行初步筛选。对其余文章的全文进行评估，以确定是否符合纳入标准。
9项研究最初符合纳入标准。这些训练计划的全面性较差，在0至30分的量表上，间歇投球训练计划清单的平均得分是20分（范围为14 - 23分）。训练计划包含多种组成部分，包括渐进式长传、加重球和投球力学练习。已确定的训练计划在持续时间、强度、进展和重点方面存在显著异质性。总体而言，对于已发表的投球训练计划，明显缺乏验证或正式研究其有效性的尝试。
当前已发表的间歇投球训练计划大多是多年前发表的原始计划的变体，基于渐进负荷原则，将疼痛作为应仔细监测的受伤迹象。然而，这些计划的临床验证和量化其有效性的客观指标极少。这项工作指出了当前文献中的几个局限性，并可为未来基于证据的间歇投球训练计划的发展奠定基础。
