Mid Sweden University

Background: 

Functional assessment in wheelchair basketball (WB) has three evaluation stages: analysis of isolated functions, combined functional measures, and the observation of volume of action (VoA) in a sporting context. Sport class allocation relies on VoA assessed in controlled conditions (VoA-capacity), which corresponds to combined functional measures, and during game observation (VoA-performance). However, the contribution of each assessment phase to sport class allocation remains insufficiently understood. This study examines how trunk and hip muscle strength influences VoA-capacity and evaluates the extent to which VoA-capacity is associated with sport class. Additionally, it compares trunk muscle strength and VoA-capacity across sport classes to characterize functional differences between groups.

Methods: 

A cross-sectional observational study was conducted with 40 officially classified WB players (sport classes 1.0–4.5). Trunk and hip muscle strength were assessed using the Manual Muscle Test (MMT). VoA-capacity was calculated as the sum of maximal trunk reaches in six directions (flexion, extension, rotation for both sides and lateral flexion for both sides) using an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) positioned at C7 (seventh cervical vertebra). Multiple linear regression, ordinal regression, Kruskal–Wallis, and Dunn's post-hoc tests were applied.

Results: 

Total Trunk-Hip muscle strength significantly predicted VoA-capacity (p < 0.001), explaining 80% of its variance (R2 = 0.80). When analyzed separately, both trunk strength (p < 0.001) and hip strength (p = 0.006,) were significantly associated of VoA-capacity. VoA-capacity was a significant predictor of sport class (p < 0.001). Significant differences were found between sport classes for VoA-capacity (p < 0.001) and for total Trunk-Hip muscle strength (p < 0.001), with post-hoc comparisons showing the largest contrasts between lower (1.0–2.0) and higher (4.0–4.5) sport classes.

Conclusion: 

Trunk and hip muscle strength showed associations with VoA capacity, suggesting their relevance for understanding players’ ability to perform dynamic seated movements. VoA-capacity, was also associated with sport class allocation. Although muscle strength is not a classification criterion in WB, profiling players’ muscular strength may offer complementary insights in complex classification scenarios. These findings provide preliminary functional evidence of WB classification and support future investigations integrating VoA-performance to refine assessment models.

Purpose

This study examined whether upper and mid trunk kinematics, measured by inertial measurement units at seventh cervical (C7) and eighth thoracic (T8) vertebral levels, distinguishes between clinically defined levels of trunk function to support classifiers’ decisions in Paralympic sports.

Methods

Sixty-three wheelchair athletes with neuromusculoskeletal impairment (54 wheelchair basketball players, 7 fencers, and 2 others) were classified into four trunk–hip function groups (Very Low, Low, Moderate, and High) using hierarchical cluster analysis based on the composite score of standardised Manual Muscle Testing of trunk and hip muscles. Participants performed maximum active range of motion (Volume of Action) tasks while sitting in four conditions with progressively reduced external support (Full, Partial, No Support, and Sport Wheelchair). Two Inertial Measurement Units recorded trunk kinematics at 100 Hz. Inter-segmental peak angular differences between sensors were compared across groups using Kruskal–Wallis tests.

Results

Active range of motion from individual C7 and T8 sensors differentiated most trunk–hip function group pairs (88% of comparisons). Peak trunk angle differed between sensors in 66% of comparisons, particularly for rotation (8–20°) and lateral tilt (4–14°). These inter-segmental C7–T8 differences separated groups in 23% of comparisons (mean difference: 10°; range: 4–20°).

Conclusions

Active range of motion from a single upper trunk (C7) sensor discriminated between most trunk function group pairs and appears sufficient for classification. Inter-segmental C7–T8 trunk peak angle differences provided limited additional classification value beyond single-sensor measurements, supporting the use of simplified field assessment protocols.

Background

Physical activity is essential for preventing noncommunicable diseases and improving health parameters. However, individuals with intellectual disabilities often struggle to meet recommended activity levels. Sustainable solutions and long-term follow-up are crucial for evaluating intervention efficacy.

Methods

This mixed-method longitudinal follow-up study examines the effects and experiences of a 12-week web-based exercise programme on individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID). Body composition, physical activity levels and waist circumference were measured before and after the 12-week intervention period as well as 12 months after the end of the intervention period (i.e., long-term follow-up). Experiences were analysed using semistructured interviews. In the data analysis, repeated measures ANOVA with Bonferroni correction was utilised to investigate changes over time.

Results

No significant changes were observed after 12 months, but there were effects on postintervention compared with preintervention on waist circumference. Some participants reported experiencing health benefits, which contributed to motivation, while others lacked motivation and were unaware that they could continue to exercise.

Conclusions

While improvements were noted post-intervention, sustaining these gains proved challenging during long-term follow-up. This study highlights the potential of web-based exercise programmes to support individuals with ID in increasing physical activity levels. However, the findings also underscore the need for more tailored and sustainable interventions, including structured support and ongoing engagement strategies, to enable lasting health behaviour change over time.

Background Physical activity is essential for health and well-being during adolescence, and active behaviour early in life predicts higher physical activity levels in adulthood. Although adolescents with intellectual disability (ID) consistently show lower activity levels than peers without ID, national environments—such as school structures, disability support systems, and access to inclusive leisure activities—may influence these patterns. There is limited evidence from Sweden, a country with distinct educational and support frameworks for youth with ID. The present study aimed to examine physical activity patterns among Swedish adolescents with and without ID using accelerometer data. Methods Physical activity was measured objectively using hip-worn accelerometers (ActiGraph GT3X) over seven consecutive days. This cross-sectional study included 45 adolescents with mild-to-moderate ID (median [IQR], 17.0 [14.0–19.0] years; 45.2% females) and 70 adolescents without ID (16.0 [15.0-16.3] years; 62.2% females). Physical activity was categorised as sedentary behaviour (SB), light physical activity (LPA), and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and analysed across school days, weekend days, and separately for daytime and evening periods on school days. Results Overall, the relative amount of SB was similar between groups (p > 0.05), but significant differences were observed for LPA and MVPA. Adolescents with ID accumulated more LPA during school-day daytime hours (23% vs. 19%; p = 0.012), while peers without ID accumulated more MVPA during leisure time, such as school-day evenings (p = 0.025) and weekends (p = 0.039). For both groups, MVPA was higher on school days than on weekends (p < 0.001). Among adolescents with ID, SB increased markedly on weekends (72% vs. 77%; p < 0.001). Conclusion Adolescents with ID were generally less physically active than peers without ID, except during schoolday daytime, where the MVPA was similar and LPA was higher. Leisure time, particularly weekends and schoolday evenings, seems to be a critical period in achieving sufficient MVPA among adolescents with ID. Targeted interventions and coordinated support from key stakeholders such as school health services, paediatric health care, social care services and organised sports, with a particular focus on unstructured time, may help promote active lifestyles and reduce health disparities in this population.

Aim

Evidence on physical activity (PA), sedentary time, and fitness in adolescents with impairments has been limited. We aimed to compare outcomes in Swedish adolescents with and without impairments and between impairment types.

Methods

This cross-sectional study, from September to December 2019, comprised of adolescents from 34 mainstream schools within 3 h' drive of Stockholm, Sweden. Parents reported impairment status. PA and sedentary time were measured with accelerometers during school and leisure time on weekdays and weekends. Fitness was estimated using the Ekblom-Bak submaximal cycle test, sports participation was self-reported and multilevel mixed models were used for analyses.

Results

We enrolled 972 adolescents (51% girls), with a mean age of 13.4 ± 0.3 years. Just under a third (31%) had impairments. Adolescents with impairments showed lower PA levels, less adherence to recommendations, lower fitness and less participation in organised sports than those without impairments. Those with learning or visual impairments engaged in less vigorous activity and the former had lower fitness levels.

Conclusion

Adolescents with impairments were less physically active, more sedentary and had lower fitness than peers without impairments. This emphasises the need for equitable opportunities for PA, to support long-term health and well-being in adolescents with impairments.

Since the 1990s, the field of sports technology and engineering has expanded beyond an initial focus on sports equipment and materials to include various topics. These topics span sustainable equipment design and manufacturing, user‑centred design, biomechanics and human‑equipment interaction, field testing, sensors and instrumentation of sports equipment and clothing, smart textiles, artificial intelligence and big data, and the development of human body surrogates for testing protective equipment. This second edition of Routledge Handbook of Sports Technology and Engineering pulls together the full depth and breadth of this field, explores current issues and controversies, and looks to future research directions. Bringing together many of the world’s leading experts and scientists, this book emphasises the current understanding of the underlying mechanics associated with sport and physical activity, exercise, training, and athletic performance in relation to sports equipment, clothing, and training, and officiating technologies in a broad sense.

This book has five sections:

Sports mechanics 

Sports materials 

Sports equipment design and manufacture 

Sports biomechanics and human‑equipment interaction 

Field testing, sensors, and instrumentation 

Written by an international team of leading experts, the emphasis throughout this book is on bridging the gap between scientific research and application within sports products and their effect on training and competition. This text is important reading for students, scholars, and others with an interest in engineering related to sport, exercise, and health in general.TABLE OF CONTENTSPart I: Sports mechanics. 1. Introduction to sports mechanics. 2. Projectiles in sport. 3. Computational fluid dynamics applied in sport: Part 1 – Capabilities and considerations. 4. Computational fluid dynamics applied in sport: Part 2 – Application in sport. 5. Soft materials in sport. 6. Finite element modelling in sport. 7. Musculoskeletal simulation in sport. Part II: Sports materials. 8. Introduction to sports materials. 9. Cellular solids for sports applications: Part 1 – Macroscopic properties and applications. 10. Cellular solids for sports applications: Part 2 – Micromechanics. 11. Fibre‑reinforced composites for sports applications. 12. Advanced materials for board sports. 13. Textiles for sports clothing. Part III: Sports equipment design and manufacture. 14. Introduction to sports equipment design and manufacture. 15. Design and manufacturing of textile sports equipment. 16. 3D printing in sports. 17. Sustainable design and manufacturing of sports equipment. 18. Cricket gear and sustainability. 19. Design considerations for body padding in rugby. 20. Ergonomics and user‑centered design of sports equipment. 21. The application of biological engineering to sports technology. 22. Design for athletes. Part IV: Sports biomechanics and human‑equipment interaction. 23. Introduction to sports biomechanics and human‑equipment interaction. 24. Biomechanical interactions with footwear. 25. How the golfer and driver interact to determine performance. 26. The quantified tennis athlete: The performer, the ball, the racquet and the technology. 27. Sports injury and trauma biomechanics: Surrogates, human data and modeling. 28. Biomechanics of athletes with impairment and adaptive equipment. Part V: Field testing, sensors and instrumentation for the digital athlete. 29. Introduction to field testing, sensors and instrumentation for the digital athlete. 30. Longitudinal assessment in sport: Injury and performance assessment. 31. Passive sensing in sport. 32. Inertial sensing in sports: Application and technical considerations. 33. Artificial intelligence approaches in sport. 34. Interoperable digital measurement and modelling to optimise tennis racket design: A case study. 35. Big data in sport: Case studies in football and tennis.

Athletes with impairments often require special equipment to participate in sports events. In the development and evaluation of sports equipment for athletes with impairments, the interaction between athlete and equipment, as well as the interface, plays an even greater role than in non-disabled sports. From a sports engineering perspective, this offers a wide range of opportunities for improvement, but care must be taken not to violate the four principles of the IPC Policy on Sports Equipment: Safety, Fairness, Universality, and Physical Prowess. This chapter describes key background information on sports equipment for athletes with impairments and on considerations regarding design and evaluation. In addition, examples of recent research are discussed, and finally, the role of biomechanical simulation in this field is explored. The complexity of sports, the human body, physical impairments, and sports rules indicates there is a continuing need for interdisciplinary research to improve the interaction between impairment, performance, and equipment for athletes within the specified limits of the IPC rules-an endeavour in which sports engineers will continue to play a major role.