Development of a new scale for perceived self-efficacy in manual wheeled mobility:a pilot study

Objective: To study the psychometric qualities of a perceived self-efficacy in wheeled mobility scale. Design: Questionnaires. Subjects: Forty-seven wheelchair users with spinal cord injury (elite athletes n= 25, recreational n= 22, from 6 different countries). Method: Based on the literature, and expert's and wheelchair user's comments, a new Self-Efficacy in Wheeled Mobility Scale (SEWM(1)) was developed. Internal consistency (split-half and Cronbach's alpha) and concurrent validity (correlating the Self-Efficacy in Wheeled Mobility Scale with the Generalized Perceived Self-efficacy Scale (GSE) and the spinal cord injury Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale (ESES)) were assessed. To evaluate the construct validity, age, lesion level and completeness and time since injury between groups of participants and their total scores were compared statistically. Results: Cronbach's alpha for the SEWM was 0.91, internal consistency was r=0.90. Significant correlations between pairs of scales of the entire sample (SEWM-ESES: 0.60; SEWM-GSE: 0.50 (p <0.05; n=47, 2-tailed) and of the subgroup comparison (SEWM-ESES recreational r= 0.61; elite r=0.73), demonstrated fair construct and concurrent validity of the SEWM. Conclusion: The SEWM was found to be reliable and valid in active spinal cord injury. A larger more diverse sample is needed to support the psychometric qualities of the SEWM scale

Pacing Ability in Elite Runners with Intellectual Impairment

Purpose. To understand how athletes invest their energy over a race, differences in pacing ability between athletes with and without intellectual impairment (II) were explored using a novel field test. Methods. Well-trained runners (n=67) participated in this study, including 34 runners with II (age = 24.4 +/- 4.5 years; IQ = 63.1 +/- 7.7) and 33 runners without II (age = 31.4 +/- 11.2 years). The ability to perform at a pre-planned submaximal pace was assessed. Two 400m running trials were performed on an athletics track, with an individually standardized velocity. In the first trial, the speed was imposed by auditory signals given in 20m-40m intervals, in combination with coach-feedback during the initial 200m. The participant was instructed to maintain this velocity without any feedback during the final 200m. In trial 2, no coach-feedback was permitted. Results. Repeated measures analyses revealed a significant between-groups effect. II-runners deviated more from the target time than runners without II. The significant trial x group interaction effect (F = 4.15, p<.05) revealed that the ability to self-regulate the pace during the final 200m improved for runners without II (Trial 1: 1.7 +/- 1.0s, Trial 2: 0.9 +/-0.8s) whereas the II-runners deviated even more in Trial 2 (4.4 +/- 4.3s), than in Trial 1 (3.2 +/- 3.9s). Conclusion. Our findings support the assumption that intellectual capacity is involved in pacing. It is demonstrated that II-runners have difficulties maintaining a preplanned submaximal velocity, and this study contributes to understanding problems II-exercisers might experience when exercising. With this field test, we can assess the impact of II on pacing and performance in individual athletes which will lead to a fair Paralympic classification-procedure

Towards evidence-based classification in wheelchair sports: Impact of seating position on wheelchair acceleration

In most Paralympic wheelchair sports, active trunk range of movement is assessed by observing shoulder girdle excursion during active trunk movements and is a key determinant of an athlete's class. However, to date research evaluating the impact of reduced trunk range of movement on wheelchair sports performance has not been conducted. In the present study, 15 non-disabled male participants performed two 20-s sprints on a wheelchair ergometer in each of three seating positions. Positions were typical of those used to enhance sitting stability in wheelchair sport and each impacted available trunk range of movement differently: condition-90 (seated with thighs horizontal; unrestricted range of movement) condition-45 (seated with thighs in 45°), and condition-0 (seated with hips maximally flexed; minimum range of movement). In condition-90, the trunk only actively contributed to the first push; for the remainder of the sprint, the trunk was held almost isometrically at 48.2° to the horizontal (range 42.1–56.4°). Similar patterns were observed for both condition-45 and condition-0. Compared with condition-90, participants in condition-0 had reduced capacity to accelerate of statistical (P < 0.05) and practical significance. These findings are an important initial step towards evidence-based decision making in classification. Future research should evaluate the individual and collective impact of other factors that affect the trunk's contribution to wheelchair sports performance, including strapping, seating position, and impairments of trunk muscle power and coordination

Test of Wheeled Mobility (TOWM) and a short wheelie test:a feasibility and validity study

<p>Objective: To assess the feasibility and validity of both the Test of Wheeled Mobility (TOWM) and a wheelie test.</p><p>Design: Cross-sectional study.</p><p>Setting: KU Leuven gymnasium.</p><p>Subjects: Thirty male manual wheelchair users (age range 23-53 years) with spinal cord injury.</p><p>Interventions: Participants preformed both tests after completing a personal information form and a 'Perceived self-efficacy in WM' scale. The TOWM consists of 30 tasks reflecting functional wheeled mobility. The wheelie test consists of eight tasks measuring the ability to perform a 'wheelie' in challenging situations.</p><p>Main measure: Ability, performance time, qualitative and anxiety scores were assessed. Convergent validity was tested by correlating the TOWM and the wheelie test scores. Construct validity was assessed by testing whether the four scores of both tests are significantly related to perceived self-efficacy in wheeled mobility, time since injury and sport participation.</p><p>Results: TOWM average total testing time was 24.7 minutes (+/- 5.93) and the wheelie test was 12.62 minutes (+/- 5.08). Convergent validity was confirmed by the positive correlation between the TOWM and wheelie test total ability scores (r = 0.84; P <0.001), quality scores (r = 0.88) and anxiety scores (r = 0.66). Moderate correlations were found between the total time scores of the TOWM and wheelie test (r = 0.47). Construct validity was confirmed by fair to moderate correlations between both test's scores with time since injury, self-efficacy and sport participation after injury.</p><p>Conclusion: The TOWM and the wheelie tests are feasible and valid instruments for assessing manual wheelchair mobility in persons with spinal cord injury.</p>

Improvement of the classification system for wheelchair rugby: athlete priorities

A representative sample (N=302) of the wheelchair rugby population responded to a survey about the classification system based on prioritized items by International Wheelchair Rugby Federation members. Respondents stated, "The classification system is accurate but needs adjustments" (56%), "Any athlete with tetraequivalent impairment should be allowed to compete" (72%), "Athletes with cerebral palsy and other coordination impairments should be classified with a system different than the current one" (75%), and "The maximal value for trunk should be increased from 1.0 to 1.5" (67%). A minority stated, "Wheelchair rugby should only be open to spinal cord injury and other neurological conditions" (36%) and "There should be a 4.0 class" (33%). Results strongly indicated that athletes and stakeholders want adjustments to the classification system in two areas: a focus on evaluation of athletes with impairments other than loss of muscle power caused by spinal cord injury and changes in classification of trunk impairment.status: publishe