What throwing frame configuration should be used to investigate the impact of different impairment types on Paralympic seated throwing?

International Paralympic Committee Athletics classification aims to place athletes who throw from a seated position into classes according to how much their neuromusculoskeletal impairments affect that activity, so that impairment severity does not influence competition outcome. Current classification methods are not evidence based and their development requires research in which athletes with varying impairments throw from standardized throwing frame configurations, thereby permitting quantification of impairment impact. Unfortunately athletes throw from highly individualized (not standardized) positions. This study aimed to establish two standardized seating configurations – one with assistive pole, one without – which would permit conduct of the required research. Using a custom-built, adjustable throwing frame, 47 non-disabled males self-selected their preferred seated throwing configurations with an assistive pole and without. Seventeen repeated the self-selection process within a week. All then completed three maximal throws from their self-selected configurations. Mean configuration without pole was 34° (seat angle) and 17% sitting height (backrest). Mean configuration with a pole was 32° (seat angle), 15% sitting height (backrest), 75° elbow extension, and 127° pelvic angle (pole position). Results establish the seated throwing configurations preferred by non-disabled people, providing a valid guide for researchers wishing to evaluate the impact of impairment on seated throwing performance.

[1]  Glenn S. Fleisig,et al.  Relationship of Pelvis and Upper Torso Kinematics to Pitched Baseball Velocity , 2001 .

[2]  Laurent A. Frossard,et al.  Throwing frame and performance of elite male seated shot-putters , 2010 .

[3]  D. L. Gallahue,et al.  Understanding motor development: Infants, children, adolescents , 1989 .

[4]  S M Tweedy,et al.  Towards evidence-based classification in Paralympic athletics: evaluating the validity of activity limitation tests for use in classification of Paralympic running events , 2009, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[5]  D. L. Gallahue,et al.  Understanding Motor Development : Infants, Children, Adolescents, Adults , 1994 .

[6]  J W Chow,et al.  Kinematic analysis of shot-putting performed by wheelchair athletes of different medical classes. , 1999, Journal of sports sciences.

[7]  John W. Chow,et al.  Kinematic analysis of shot-putting performed by wheelchair athletes of different medical classes , 2000 .

[8]  Glenn S. Fleisig,et al.  Biomechanics of Overhand Throwing with Implications for Injuries , 1996, Sports medicine.

[9]  G. Fleisig,et al.  Biomechanics of pitching with emphasis upon shoulder kinematics. , 1993, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[10]  J W Chow,et al.  Discus throwing performances and medical classification of wheelchair athletes. , 1998, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[11]  Y C Vanlandewijck,et al.  International Paralympic Committee position stand—background and scientific principles of classification in Paralympic sport , 2009, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[12]  Laurent A. Frossard,et al.  Quality Control Procedure for Kinematic Analysis of Elite Seated Shot-Putters During World-Class Events , 2008 .

[13]  J. Weir Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. , 2005, Journal of strength and conditioning research.

[14]  Alison O'Riordan,et al.  Shot trajectory parameters in gold medal stationary shot-putters during world-class competition. , 2007, Adapted physical activity quarterly : APAQ.