A low carrying angle is measured in elite tennis players just before ball impact during the forehand, suggesting a dynamic varus instant accommodation moving towards full extension

Abstract

Purpose: The goal of this study was to use image analysis recordings to measure the carrying angle of elite male tennis players during the forehand stroke, with the hypothesis that elite tennis players overstress their elbow in valgus over the physiological degree in the frontal plane just before ball contact on forehand groundstrokes. Methods: The carrying angle of male tennis players ranked in the top 25 positions in the ATP ranking was measured on selected video frames with the elbow as close as possible to full extension just before the ball-racket contact in forehands. These frames were extracted from 306 videos professionally recorded for training purposes by a high-profile video analyst. All measures were conducted by three independent observers. Results: Sixteen frames were finally included. The mean carrying angle was 11.5° ± 4.7°. The intraclass correlation coefficient value was 0.703, showing good reliability of the measurement technique. The measured carrying angle was lower than what has been observed in historical cohorts using comparable measurement methodology, suggesting a possible instant varus accommodation mechanism before hitting the ball. Conclusions: The observed decrease in the carrying angle is a consequence of an increase in elbow flexion position dictated by the transition from a closed to open, semi-open stances. As the elbow flexes during the preparation phase, it is less constrained by the olecranon and its fossa, increasing the strain on the medial collateral ligament and capsule structures. Moving towards full extension before the ball-racket contact, the elbow is dynamically stabilised by a contraction of the flexor muscles. These observations could provide a new explanation for medial elbow injuries among elite tennis players and drive specific rehabilitation protocols. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Level of Evidence: Level IV.