Loading [Contrib]/a11y/accessibility-menu.js
1.
Nakao H, Hamada T, Shimizu R, Hida M, Morifuji T. Association between Body Composition Characteristics and Chronic Low Back Pain in High-School Baseball Players: A Retrospective Study. IJSPT. 2025;20(11):1594-1601. doi:10.26603/​001c.146018
Download all (2)

Abstract

Background

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is common among adolescent athletes, particularly baseball players; however, its association with body composition remains unclear.

Purpose

To investigate the relationship between body composition parameters and the presence of CLBP in high-school baseball players.

Study Design

Retrospective cohort study

Methods

Male high-school baseball players were recruited and divided into the CLBP and non-CLBP groups. CLBP was defined as low back pain rated ≥3 on the numerical rating scale (NRS) and lasting >12 weeks. Body composition was measured using bioelectrical impedance analysis in the first year of high school. Logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with CLBP.

Results

Ninety male baseball players participated (mean age: 16.8±0.4 years, during second year). The CLBP group (n=31) showed significantly higher percentage body fat (PBF), body fat mass (BFM), BFM index, and trunk fat mass compared with the non-LBP group (n=59). Logistic regression analysis identified first-year NRS scores (odds ratio [OR]: 2.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.46–3.21) and PBF (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.05–1.51) as significant predictors of CLBP.

Conclusion

Elevated body fat percentage and elevated pain intensity in early high-school years were associated with the development of CLBP among high-school baseball players. Regular monitoring of body composition and early intervention based on pain levels may effectively prevent CLBP in adolescent baseball players, thereby supporting better long-term athletic performance and health outcomes

Level of Evidence

3b

Introduction

Baseball is a widely played popular sport in Japan, with a large number of participants at the youth level. Upper limb injuries, such as those affecting the shoulder and elbow, are common in baseball, and low back injuries are frequent.1,2 Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have reported a high prevalence of low back pain (LBP) in adolescent athletes (1-year prevalence: 29–55%), and identified risk factors, such as overweight/high body mass index (BMI), sport participation, and training volume/intensity.3

A survey of university athletes found that baseball players had the second highest prevalence of LBP after volleyball players, with an odds ratio (OR) 3.2 times higher than that of non-athletes for lumbar disc degeneration.4 A cross-sectional study of high-school baseball players revealed that 49.1% experienced LBP, with 20.3% classified as having chronic LBP (CLBP).5 Similarly, more than 30% of university baseball players reported experiencing LBP.6 These findings indicate that LBP is highly prevalent among Japanese baseball players.

Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown a correlation between an elevated BMI and the severity of LBP in the general adult population.7,8 This suggests that body composition may be an important factor for evaluating the risk of LBP, even among athletes. In cases of CLBP, specific physical or body composition characteristics, such as high body fat or low muscle mass levels, may increase the load on the lumbar spine and serve as contributing factors. Additionally, baseball players are exposed to repetitive and asymmetrical trunk movements during pitching and hitting, which generate substantial torsional and compressive forces on the lumbar spine.9 These biomechanical stresses may elevate the risk of spinal injury, particularly in the presence of physical factors, such as inadequate muscular support or excess adiposity.

Body composition is typically categorized into fat, fat-free, and bone mass. In athletic populations, assessments usually emphasize fat mass and lean mass, often expressed as relative measures, such as percentage body fat (PBF) and fat-free mass (FFM) index (FFMI), to account for differences in body size and height.
Studies of ice hockey and rugby players have reported associations between body composition and LBP, particularly in relation to the size and fat content of the multifidus muscles.10,11 In ice hockey players, higher PBF has been significantly correlated with smaller multifidus muscle size, suggesting that increased fat mass may hinder muscle development and elevate mechanical stress on the lumbar region.10Similar associations between muscle characteristics and LBP have been observed in rugby players.11
In contrast, few studies have examined the relationship between body composition and LBP in baseball players.5 Given that CLBP may be influenced by specific physical characteristics, including body fat distribution, a more detailed evaluation of body composition in this population is warranted. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between body composition parameters and the presence of chronic low back pain (CLBP) in high-school baseball players.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective cohort study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Research Ethics Review Board of Osaka Kawasaki Rehabilitation University (Approval No. OKRU-RA0003). Written informed consent was obtained from all the participants and their guardians, and additional consent was obtained from the team manager.

Participants

All participants were male high school baseball players from a school in Japan. All players trained six days per week, averaging approximately four hours per day. During the winter off-season (December to February), training emphasized running, strength training, and batting practice, with reduced pitching activity.

Players were recruited during their team’s annual medical assessments. Inclusion criteria were participation in regular team training, and completion of both first-year and second-year assessments. Players who reported low back pain lasting for more than three months in their second year, and meeting the clinical definition of chronic low back pain (CLBP; pain intensity ≥ 3 on the numerical rating scale persisting for at least 12 weeks) were assigned to a CLBP group.12 Players who reported no low back pain during either year were assigned to a non-low back pain group.

Exclusion criteria were (1) a history of low back pain not meeting the definition of CLBP, and (2) incomplete survey data. All participants and their guardians provided written informed consent, and additional permission was obtained from the team manager.

Questionnaire

A self-administered questionnaire was used to assess the presence and intensity of LBP and gather baseball-related information. The questionnaire collected information on baseball experience (years) and primary playing positions (pitcher, catcher, infielder, and outfielder).

Players were informed in advance that their responses would not be shared with the coaches or team staff.

Pain intensity was measured using a visual NRS, ranging from 0 (“no pain”) to 10 (“worst imaginable pain”). LBP history and current symptoms were assessed separately to distinguish past and ongoing pain. The questionnaire used in this study is shown in Appendix 1.

Body Composition

Body composition data collected during the first year of high school were analyzed retrospectively. A bioelectrical impedance analyzer (InBody 270; InBody Co., Ltd., Seoul, Republic of Korea) operating at frequencies of 20 and 1000 kHz was used. The following parameters were recorded:

Anthropometrics included: Height (measured using a portable stadiometer), weight, and BMI; Lean and fat mass metrics: Soft lean mass, FFM, skeletal muscle mass (SMM), and body fat mass (BFM).Segmental analysis included: Lean and fat masses of the right and left arms, trunk, and right and left legs. Indices including PBF, SMM index, FFMI (FFMI = FFM/height²), and BFM index (BFMI = BFM/height²) were measured using the InBody 270. The InBody 270 has been previously validated for reliability and accuracy in estimating body composition across diverse populations, demonstrating high agreement with reference methods, such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.13,14

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using the IBM SPSS Statistics version 27.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. Normality of distribution was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk test. Between-group comparisons were performed using the chi-square test for categorical variables, Student t-test for continuous variables, and the Mann–Whitney U test for ordinal variables. Effect sizes for parametric comparisons were calculated using Cohen’s d to quantify the magnitude of between-group differences, interpreted as small (≥0.2), medium (≥0.5), and large (≥0.8) according to conventional benchmarks. Effect sizes were not calculated for variables analyzed with non-parametric tests due to distributional assumptions. Multivariate logistic regression was performed for variables that demonstrated significant differences in the univariate analysis. The dependent variable was the presence of CLBP, and body composition parameters were selected as independent variables. A forward stepwise model selection method was used. Model significance was evaluated using the model chi-square test, and model fit was assessed using the Hosmer–Lemeshow test, with p≥0.05 indicating a good fit.

Results

Of the 122 players initially surveyed, 27 were excluded because they reported LBP in the first year but no symptoms in the second year, while five were excluded due to incomplete questionnaire responses. The final analysis included 90 players: 31 (34.4%) and 59 (65.6%) in the CLBP and non-LBP groups, respectively. The mean (SD) age of all participants was 16.8 (0.4) years, with no significant difference between groups. Figure 1 presents the flowchart of participant inclusion and analysis.

Figure 1
Figure 1.Flow diagram of participant inclusion and exclusion.

CLBP = chronic low back pain; NRS = numerical rating scale.

Questionnaire Results

Table 1 summarizes the questionnaire results including age, years of baseball experience, playing position, and NRS score. Age, baseball experience, and position distribution did not differ between the two groups. However, the NRS scores in the CLBP group in both the first and second years were significantly higher compared to those in the non-LBP group (p < 0.001).

Table 1.Questionnaire results
  Non-LBP group (n=59) CLBP group (n=31)  
  Mean (SD) Mean (SD) p-value
Age (years) 16.8 (0.4) 16.8 (0.3) 0.63*
Baseball experience (years) 8.4 (1.2) 8.3 (1.3) 0.93
NRS (first year)(points) 0.3 (1.0) 3.4 (2.7) <0.001
NRS (second year) (points) 0.4 (1.0) 3.3 (1.5) <0.001
Pitcher n (%) 11 (19.0) 6 (19.4) 0.785
Catcher n (%) 6 (10.3) 5 (16.1)
Infielder n (%) 21 (36.2) 12 (38.7)
Outfielder n (%) 20 (34.5) 8 (25.8)

NRS, numerical rating scale     
*: Independent t-test; : Mann–Whitney U test; : Chi-square test.

Body Composition Results

Table 2 shows a comparison of body composition between the CLBP and non-LBP groups. The CLBP group had significantly higher values of PBF, BFM, BFMI, and trunk fat mass. The effect sizes for these differences were large for PBF (d=3.24) and BFM (d=2.81), and moderate for trunk fat mass (d=1.68) and BFMI (d=0.93), indicating substantial between-group differences in fat-related measures.

Table 2.Comparison of body composition between groups. Values are mean (SD)
  Total
(n= 90)
non-LBP
(n= 59)
CLBP
(n=31)
p-value Cohen’s d
Height (cm) 170.7 (5.6) 170.7 (5.7) 170.5 (5.5) 0.63a
Weight (kg) 65.2 (8.0) 64.8 (8.0) 65.9 (8.0) 0.68a
SLM (kg) 53.3 (5.9) 53.4 (6.1) 53.1 (5.6) 0.56a
SMM (kg) 31.9 (3.8) 32.1 (4.0) 31.8 (3.5) 0.57a
BMI (kg/m²) 22.3 (2.0) 22.1 (2.0) 22.6 (2.0) 0.44a
PBF (%) 13.1 (3.3) 12.4 (3.0) 14.5 (3.6) 0.01b 3.24
FFM (kg) 56.5 (6.3) 56.6(6.5) 56.2 (6.1) 0.56a
BFM (kg) 8.6 (2.8) 8.1 (2.5) 9.8 (3.5) <0.05b 2.81
Segment Lean Analysis          
Right arm (kg) 3.0 (0.4) 3.0 (0.4) 3.0 (0.4) 0.56a
Left arm (kg) 2.9 (0.4) 3.0 (0.4) 2.9 (0.3) 0.41a
Trunk (kg) 24.3 (2.5) 24.4 (2.6) 24.1 (2.1) 0.48a
Right leg (kg) 8.9 (1.0) 8.9 (1.0) 8.9 (1.0) 0.52a
Left leg (kg) 8.8 (1.0) 8.8 (1.0) 8.8 (1.0) 0.51a
Segment Fat Analysis          
Right arm 0.3 (0.1) 0.3 (0.1) 0.4 (0.2) 0.01b 0.18
Left arm 0.4(0.1) 0.3(0.1) 0.4 (0.2) <0.01b 0.18
Trunk 3.9 (1.7) 3.6(1.5) 4.5 (1.9) 0.02b 1.68
Right leg 1.4 (0.4) 1.4 (0.3) 1.6 (0.4) 0.01b 0.38
Left leg 1.4 (0.4) 1.3 (0.4) 1.6 (0.4) <0.01b 0.38
SMI (kg/m²) 8.1 (0.6) 8.1 (0.5) 8.0 (0.6) 0.45a
FFM index (kg/m²) 19.3 (1.4) 19.3 (1.5) 19.3 (1.3) 0.75a
BFM index (kg/m²) 2.9 (0.9) 2.7 (0.8) 3.3 (1.0) 0.01b 0.93

SLM, soft lean mass; BMI, body mass index; PBF, percentage body fat; FFM, fat-free mass; BFM, body fat mass; SMI, skeletal muscle mass index; n.s., not significant  
a: Mann–Whitney U test; b: Independent t-test      
Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s d for parametric variables only. For non-parametric comparisons (Mann–Whitney U test), effect sizes were not reported due to the lack of distributional assumptions. All p-values are uncorrected and exploratory; no adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.

Logistic Regression Analysis

Table 3 presents the results of logistic regression analysis for CLBP. The analysis identified the first-year NRS score and PBF as significant independent risk factors for CLBP (NRS score [first year]: B=0.773, standard error [SE]=0.201, Wald=14.766, OR, 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.46–3.21, PBF: B=0.235, SE=0.093, Wald=6.384, p<0.001, OR=1.26; 95% CI: 1.05–1.51). The model showed a good fit based on the Hosmer–Lemeshow test (p<0.05), and the overall classification accuracy was 78.2%.

Table 3.Logistic regression analysis for CLBP
    Co-efficient p-value OR 95% CI
          Low Upper
Step 1 NRS 0.733 <0.001 2.080 1.448 2.989
Step 2 PBF 0.198 0.012 1.265 1.059 1.402
  NRS 0.779 <0.001 2.165 1.460 3.211

CLBP = chronic low back pain; NRS = numerical rating scale, CI= confidence interval, OR= odds ratio, SE= standard error, PBF= percentage body fat, NRS= numerical rating scale
Step 1: Model χ2 test: p<0.01, Hosmer–Lemeshow test: p=0.435; hit ratio: 78.7
Step 2: Model χ2 test : p<0.01, Hosmer–Lemeshow test: p=0.418; hit ratio: 78.7

Discussion

This study retrospectively examined risk factors for CLBP in high-school baseball players, focusing on body composition and pain intensity. The results identified PBF and first-year NRS scores as significant predictors of CLBP.

Several fat-related parameters—including PBF, BFM, and BFMI—were significantly higher in the CLBP group than in the non-LBP group. Notably, effect sizes for PBF (Cohen’s d=3.24) and BFM (Cohen’s d=2.81) were large, indicating that these differences were not only statistically significant but also of substantial practical relevance. These findings suggest that excessive fat accumulation may contribute to the development or persistence of CLBP in adolescent athletes by increasing mechanical load on the lumbar spine or altering spinal biomechanics. Increased abdominal fat may elevate anterior shear forces on the lumbar spine, shift the center of gravity forward, and increase lumbar lordosis.15,16

The body composition results align with prior studies. Uchida et al. reported an average PBF of 17.6% in experienced high-school baseball players,17 while Hikihara et al. reported 15.7%.18 Although PBF values vary slightly across studies, the present results (CLBP: 14.5%; non-LBP: 12.4%) are consistent with these findings.Elevated PBF in the CLBP group may be linked to mechanisms proposed in previous research, suggesting that adipose tissue contributes to pain.19 Excess fat can induce chronic low-grade inflammation, with adipose tissue secreting cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor-α, adiponectin, and interleukins.20 In obesity, these cytokines may promote chronic inflammation, intervertebral disc degeneration, and muscle catabolism,21 all associated with CLBP.

Furthermore, trunk fat mass was significantly higher in the CLBP group. Given that the trunk supports spinal movement and posture, excess fat in this region may contribute to mechanical overload and back pain. Body composition in athletes can fluctuate seasonally and be influenced by training type, duration, and sport-specific demands.22,23 As body composition was measured during the off-season after several months of regular training, individual differences in training adaptation may have contributed to the observed variability. Personalized training tailored to body composition profiles may help reduce CLBP risk. According to recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses, resistance training programs lasting 14 weeks or longer are effective in reducing percentage body fat in youth populations. Moderate to high intensity exercise is generally recommended to improve body composition outcomes.24

Additionally, first-year NRS scores were a significant predictor of CLBP. Shafshak et al. reported that an NRS score >3 was associated with moderate functional disability, as measured by the Modified Oswestry Disability Index.12 In the current study, the average NRS score increased from 3.1 in the first year to 3.3 in the second year among participants with CLBP, suggesting that a score ≥3 may indicate a higher risk of developing chronic pain symptoms rather than directly predicting chronicity.

This study has several strengths, including objective measurement of body composition and a homogeneous sample of adolescent baseball players. However, several limitations should be considered. The retrospective design limits causal inference; body composition was assessed only once; and data on physical maturation, specific training volume, or lumbar structural integrity (e.g., imaging or functional muscle assessment) were not collected.

Conclusion

The results of this study indicate that higher percentage body fat and elevated baseline pain intensity may contribute to the development of chronic LBP in adolescent male baseball players. These findings should be interpreted in light of the study’s retrospective design and the absence of training and data on physical maturation and imaging.


Corresponding Author

Hidetoshi Nakao
Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Social Work Studies, Josai International University
1 Gumyo, Togane City, Chiba 283-8555, Japan
Email: h_nakao@jiu.ac.jp

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this study.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP60773182.

Accepted: September 11, 2025 CDT

References

1.
Morimoto M, Okada R, Sugiura K, et al. Low back pain and lumbar degeneration in Japanese professional baseball players. Orthop J Sports Med. 2022;10:23259671221125513. doi:10.1177/​23259671221125513. PMID:36250034
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
2.
Kato K, Otoshi K, Tominaga R, et al. Age-related differences in the limited range of motion of the low extremity and their relation to low back pain in young baseball players: a cross-sectional study of 1215 players. Sports Med Open. 2023;9:26. doi:10.1186/​s40798-023-00572-w. PMID:37138150
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
3.
Wall J, Meehan WP 3rd, Trompeter K, et al. Incidence, prevalence and risk factors for low back pain in adolescent athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2022;56:1299-1306. doi:10.1136/​bjsports-2021-104749
Google Scholar
4.
Hangai M, Kaneoka K, Okubo Y, et al. Relationship between low back pain and competitive sports activities during youth. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38:791-796. doi:10.1177/​0363546509350297
Google Scholar
5.
Nakao H, Imai R, Hamada T, et al. Factors affecting chronic low back pain among high school baseball players in Japan: a pilot study. PLoS One. 2023;18:e0280453. doi:10.1371/​journal.pone.0280453. PMID:36701350
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
6.
Tasaka S, Tashiro Y, Hotta T, Aoyama T. Examination of the relation between low back pain and individual practice content of college baseball players. J Clin Sports Med (Japan). 2016;24:4-9.
Google Scholar
7.
Zhang TT, Liu Z, Liu YL, Zhao JJ, Liu DW, Tian QB. Obesity as a risk factor for low back pain: a meta-analysis. Clin Spine Surg. 2018;31:22-27. doi:10.1097/​BSD.0000000000000468
Google Scholar
8.
Shiri R, Lallukka T, Karppinen J, Viikari-Juntura E. Obesity as a risk factor for sciatica: a meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 2014;179:929-937. doi:10.1093/​aje/​kwu007
Google Scholar
9.
Wasser JG, Zaremski JL, Herman DC, Vincent HK. Assessment and rehabilitation of chronic low back pain in baseball: part II. Res Sports Med. 2017;25:231-243. doi:10.1080/​15438627.2017.1282362. PMID:28128000
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
10.
Fortin M, Rizk A, Frenette S, Boily M, Rivaz H. Ultrasonography of multifidus muscle morphology and function in ice hockey players with and without low back pain. Phys Ther Sport. 2019;37:77-85. doi:10.1016/​j.ptsp.2019.03.004
Google Scholar
11.
Lévesque J, Rivaz H, Rizk A, Frenette S, Boily M, Fortin M. Lumbar multifidus muscle characteristics, body composition, and injury in university rugby players. J Athl Train. 2020;55:1116-1123. doi:10.4085/​1062-6050-304-19. PMID:32997748
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
12.
Shafshak TS, Elnemr R. The Visual Analogue Scale versus Numerical Rating Scale in measuring pain severity and predicting disability in low back pain. Clin Rheumatol. 2021;27:282-285. doi:10.1097/​RHU.0000000000001320
Google Scholar
13.
Larsen MN, Krustrup P, Araújo Póvoas SC, Castagna C. Accuracy and reliability of the InBody 270 multi-frequency body composition analyser in 10-12-year-old children. PloS One. 2021;16:e0247362. doi:10.1371/​journal.pone.0247362. PMID:33770106
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
14.
McLester CN, Nickerson BS, Kliszczewicz BM, McLester JR. Reliability and agreement of various InBody Body composition analyzers as compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in healthy men and women. J Clin Densitom. 2020;23:443-450. doi:10.1016/​j.jocd.2018.10.008
Google Scholar
15.
Romero-Vargas S, Zárate-Kalfópulos B, Otero-Cámara E, et al. The impact of body mass index and central obesity on the spino-pelvic parameters: a correlation study. Eur Spine J. 2013;22:878-882. doi:10.1007/​s00586-012-2560-0. PMID:23149493
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
16.
Sheng B, Feng C, Zhang D, Spitler H, Shi L. Associations between obesity and spinal diseases: A medical expenditure panel study analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017;14:183. doi:10.3390/​ijerph14020183. PMID:28208824
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
17.
Uchida H. The relationships between physique and throwing ability in high school baseball players. J Okayama Med Associat. 1992;104:789-795.
Google Scholar
18.
Hikihara Y, Saitoh S, Yoshitake Y. Validity of methods to measure total energy expenditure of baseball players in Japanese high school. Jpn J Phys Fit Sports Med. 2005;54:363-372.
Google Scholar
19.
Kawai T, Autieri MV, Scalia R. Adipose tissue inflammation and metabolic dysfunction in obesity. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2021;320:C375-c391. doi:10.1152/​ajpcell.00379.2020. PMID:33356944
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
20.
Cao H. Adipocytokines in obesity and metabolic disease. J Endocrinol. 2014;220:T47-T59. doi:10.1530/​JOE-13-0339. PMID:24403378
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
21.
Hussain SM, Urquhart DM, Wang Y, et al. Fat mass and fat distribution are associated with low back pain intensity and disability: results from a cohort study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2017;19:26. doi:10.1186/​s13075-017-1242-z. PMID:28183360
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
22.
Hebert JJ, Kjaer P, Fritz JM, Walker BF. The relationship of lumbar multifidus muscle morphology to previous, current, and future low back pain: a 9-year population-based prospective cohort study. Spine. 2014;39:1417-1425. doi:10.1097/​BRS.0000000000000424
Google Scholar
23.
Frantz T, Matre B, Palmer T, Ruiz M. Seasonal changes in body composition in collegiate baseball players. Curr Orthop Pract. 2019;30:235-238. doi:10.1097/​BCO.0000000000000747
Google Scholar
24.
Méndez-Hernández LD, Ramírez-Moreno E, Barrera-Gálvez R, et al. Effects of strength training on body fat in children and adolescents with overweight and obesity: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Children (Basel). 2022;9:995. doi:10.3390/​children9070995. PMID:35883978
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed

Appendix 1. Questionnaire used in this study

This questionnaire was developed and administered in Japanese by the authors, based on previous studies.5
It assessed basic baseball-related information and the presence and intensity of low back pain (LBP) using a numerical rating scale (NRS).