Table 6.
Results of individual studies on throwing velocity.
| Study | Group | Baseline | Post-intervention (mph) | Differences | Within group comparison* | Between group comparison* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brose et al. [30] | EG (Pulley) | not described | not described | −.001, 132,01 | Significantly improved | Not significant |
| Brose et al. [30] | EG (Weighted balls) | not described | not described | −.000,729,54 | Significantly improved | Not significant |
| Brose et al. [30] | CG | not described | not described | −.000,303,96 | Not significant | Not significant |
| Carter et al. [36] | EG (Plyometric training) | 83.19 ± 3.06 mph | 85.14 ± 4.53 mph | +1.95 | Significantly improved | Significantly better than CG |
| Carter et al. [36] | CG | 78.97 ± 3.06 mph | 79.18 ± 4.54 mph | +0.21 | Not significant | Significantly worse than EG |
| DeRenne et al. [31] | EG (Overweight Balls) | 70.58 ± 4.03 mph | 74.33 ± 5.24 mph | +3.75 | Not described | Significantly better than CG |
| DeRenne et al. [31] | EG (Underweight Balls) | 70.78 ± 4.87 mph | 75.50 ± 4.07 mph | +4.72 | Not described | Significantly better than CG |
| DeRenne et al. [31] | CG | 69.63 ± 3.57 mph | 70.47 ± 3.57 mph | +0.88 | Not described | Significantly worse than EGs |
| DeRenne et al. [34] | EG (Combined training) | HS: 73.02 ± 0.57 mph UP: 76.95 ± 0.25 mph |
HS: 77.09 ± 1.95 mph UP: 80.26 ± 1.16 mph |
HS: 4.07 UP: 3.31 |
Significantly improved | Significantly better than CG |
| DeRenne et al. [34] | EG (Blocked Training) | HS: 74.09 ± 0.69 mph UP: 76.46 ± 0.43 mph |
HS: 78.16 ± 1.88 mph UP: 79.34 ± 0.98 mph |
HS: 4.07 UP: 2.88 |
Significantly improved | Significantly better than CG |
| DeRenne et al. [34] | CG | HS: 71.52 ± 0.75 mph UP: 76.1 ± 0.49 mph |
HS: 71.96 ± 1.75 mph UP: 76.28 ± 1.29 mph |
HS: 0.44 UP: 0.18 |
Not significant | Significantly worse than EGs |
| Escamilla et al. [38] | EG (Elastic tubing and distance-based interval throwing) | 25.1 ± 2.8 m/s | 26.1 ± 2.8 m/s | +1.0 | Significantly improved | Not described |
| Escamilla et al. [38] | CG | 24.2 ± 3.6 m/s | 24.0 ± 3.9 m/s | −0.2 | Not significant | Not described |
| Escamilla et al. [35] | EG (Throwing training) | 32.0 ± 1.9 m/s | 32.6 ± 1.5 m/s | +0.6 | Significantly improved | Not described |
| Escamilla et al. [35] | EG (Keiser Pneumatic) | 32.4 ± 2.5 m/s | 32.8 ± 2.4 m/s | +0.4 | Significantly improved | Not described |
| Escamilla et al. [35] | EG (Plyometric) | 33.0 ± 2.3 m/s | 33.7 ± 2.3 m/s | +0.7 | Significantly improved | Not described |
| Escamilla et al. [35] | CG | 32.6 ± 3.1 m/s | 32.5 ± 2.5 m/s | −0.1 | Not significant | Not described |
| Kurland et al. [39] | EG (Circuit training) | not described | not described | not described | Not significant | Not described |
| Kurland et al. [39] | CG | not described | not described | not described | Not significant | Not described |
| Lachowetz et al. [53] | EG (Strength training) | 69.08 ± 3.07 mph | 70.77 ± 2.36 mph | +1.69 | Not described | Significantly better than CG |
| Lachowetz et al. [53] | CG | 70.36 ± 4.17 mph | 69.31 ± 3.52 mph | −1.05 | Not described | Significantly worse than EGs |
| Logan et al. [54] | EG (Isotonic resistance training) | 75.90 mph | 84.00 mph | +8.1 | Significantly improved | Significantly better than throwing training group and CG |
| Logan et al. [54] | EG (Throwing training) | 75.90 mph | 78.84 mph | +2.9 | Not significant | Significantly worse than isotonic resistance training group but not different from CG |
| Logan et al. [54] | CG | 75.16 mph | 75.31 mph | +0.2 | Not significant | Significantly worse than isotonic resistance training group but not different from throwing group |
| McEvoy et al. [37] | EG (Dynamic ballistic training) | 33.7 ± 1.4 m/s | 34.3 ± 1.2 m/s | +0.6 | Significantly improved | Not significant |
| McEvoy et al. [37] | CG | 34.7 ± 1.2 m/s | 34.5 ± 1.2 m/s | −0.2 | Not significant | Not significant |
| Newton et al. [40] | EG (Medicine ball) | 31.0 ± 1.9 m/s | 31.5 ± 1.5 m/s | +1.6 | Not significant | Not significant |
| Newton et al. [40] | EG (Weight training) | 31.7 ± 2.5 m/s | 33.0 ± 2.2 m/s | +4.1 | Significantly improved | Not significant |
| Newton et al. [40] | CG | 32.5 ± 1.6 m/s | 32.3 ± 2.3 m/s | −0.7 | Not significant | Not significant |
| Potteiger et al. [55] | EG (Weight and sprint training) | 74.8 ± 5.0 mph | 77.1 ± 3.8 mph | +2.3 | Significantly improved | Not significant |
| Potteiger et al. [55] | CG | 73.7 ± 4.3 mph | 73.0 ± 5.0 mph | −0.7 | Not significant | Not significant |
| Reinold et al. [32] | EG (Weighted balls) | 29.9 ± 1.5 m/s | 30.9 ± 1.5 m/s | +1.0 | Significantly improved | Significantly better than CG |
| Reinold et al. [32] | CG | 30.9 ± 1.3 m/s | 31.2 ± 1.3 m/s | +0.3 | Not significant | Significantly worse than EG |
| Wooden et al. [56] | EG (Individualized Dynamic Variable Resistance Mode) | Not described | Not described | +2.1 | Not described | Significantly better than isokinetic group and CG |
| Wooden et al. [56] | EG (Isokinetic Mode) | Not described | Not described | +0.9 | Not described | Significantly worse than resisted mode but not different from CG |
| Wooden et al. [56] | CG | Not described | Not described | −0.3 | Not described | Significantly worse than resisted mode but not different from isokinetic group |
| Yang et al. [33] | EG (Weighted Ball Training Program) | 107.81 ± 6.66 kph | 111.18 ± 6.74 kph | +3.20 | Significantly improved | Significantly better than CG |
| Yang et al. [33] | CG | 107.75 ± 8.51 kph | 108.54 ± 8.18 kph | +0.77 | Not significant | Significantly worse than EG |
HS: high-school; UP: university pitchers; * To achieve a p-value <0.05, as indicated by the tests conducted in the individual studies.