NARRATIVE REVIEW
The effects on sports performance of technologic advances in sports prostheses and wheelchairs
Arthur Jason De Luigi DO, MHSA, FAAPM&R,
Corresponding Author
Arthur Jason De Luigi DO, MHSA, FAAPM&R
Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Correspondence
Arthur Jason De Luigi, Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorArthur Jason De Luigi DO, MHSA, FAAPM&R,
Corresponding Author
Arthur Jason De Luigi DO, MHSA, FAAPM&R
Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Correspondence
Arthur Jason De Luigi, Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorFirst published: 28 March 2024
Abstract
The field of medicine continues to advance as new technologies emerge. These technological advancements include the science of sports prostheses and wheelchairs, in which there have been significant advancements over the past decades. The world of adaptive sports continues to expand, largely due to a combination of the increase in awareness, inclusion, and technology. As participation in sports for people with impairments increases, there has been an associated demand for new, innovative adaptive sporting equipment designs that help accommodate the physical deficits of the individual. Controversy has risen as persons with disabilities advance their skills with adaptive sports equipment to compete with individuals without disabilities. The controversy leads to the question: is the adaptive equipment allowing athletes with disability to regain the lost function from their baseline or does it allow them to exceed prior ability level? This narrative review provides information regarding the performance effects of advances in technology and biomechanics of adaptive sports equipment to help answer these questions.
REFERENCES
- 1Bragaru M, Dekker R, Geertzen JHB, Dijkstra PU. Amputees and sports: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2011; 41(9): 721-740.
- 2Burkett B. Technology in paralympic sports: performance enhancement or essential for performance? Br J Sports Med. 2010; 44: 215-220.
- 3Dyer B. Development of high performance parasport prosthetic limbs: a proposed framework and case study. Assist Technol. 2020; 32: 214-221.
- 4Waters RL, Perry J, Antonelli D, Hislop H. Energy cost of walking of amputees: the influence of level of amputation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976; 58(1): 42-46.
- 5Waters RL, Perry J, Chambers R. Energy expenditure of amputee gait. In: WS Moore et al., eds. Lower Limb Amputation. Saunders; 1989: 250-260.
- 6Kuiken TA, Miller L, Lipschutz R, Huang ME. Rehabilitation of people with lower limb amputation. In: RL Braddom, ed. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Elsevier; 2007: 283-323.
- 7De Luigi AJ. Adaptive Sports Medicine: A Clinical Guide. Springer; 2018.
10.1007/978-3-319-56568-2 Google Scholar
- 8Fischer G, Antunes D, Volpato BS, Delevatti RS. Metabolic cost and performance of athletes with lower limb amputation and nonamputee matched controls during running: a systematic review. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2022; 101: 584-589.
- 9Beck ON, Grabowski AM. Athletes with versus without leg amputations: different biomechanics, similar running economy. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2019; 47: 15-21.
- 10Morrien F, Taylor MJD, Hettinga FJ. Biomechanics in paralympics: implications for performance. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017; 12(5): 578-589.
- 11Weyand PF, Bundle MW, McGowan CP, et al. The fastest runner on artificial legs: different limbs, similar function? J Appl Physiol. 2009; 107: 903-911.
- 12Beck ON, Taboga P, Grabowski AM. Sprinting with prosthetic versus biological legs: insight from experimental data. R Soc Open Sci. 2022; 9: 211799.
- 13Weyand PG, Brooks LC, Prajapati S. Artificially long legs directly enhance long sprint running performance. R Soc Open Sci. 2022; 9: 220397.
- 14Fergason JR, Harsch PD. Lower limb prosthetics for sports and recreation. In: MK Lenhart, ed. Care of the Combat Amputee. Office of the Surgeon General, US Army Medical Department Center and School; 2009: 24.
- 15Mizuno N, Aoyama T, Nakajima A, Kasahara T, Takami K. Functional evaluation by gait analysis of various ankle-foot assemblies used by below-knee amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1992; 16: 174-182.
- 16Hadj-Moussa F, Zahid HB, Wright FV, Kelland K, Andrysek J. ‘It's more than just a running leg’: a qualitative study of running-specific prosthesis use by children and youth with lower limb absence. Disabl Rehabil. 2022; 44(23): 7190-7198.
- 17Burkett B, Smeathers J, Barker T. Walking and running inter-limb symmetry for paralympic trans-femoral amputees, a biomechanical analysis. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2003; 27: 36-47.
- 18Buckley JG. Sprint kinematics of athletes with lower limb amputations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999; 80: 501-508.
- 19Hafner BJ, Sanders JE, Czerniecki J, Fergason J. Energy storage and return prostheses: does patient perception correlate with biomechanical analysis? Clin Biomech. 2002; 17: 325-344.
- 20Graham LE, Datta D, Heller B, Howitt J, Pros D. A comparative study of conventional and energy-storing prosthetic feet in high-functioning transfemoral amputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007; 88: 801-806.
- 21Zmitrewicz RJ, Neptune RR, Walden JG, Rogers WE, Bosker GW. The effect of foot and ankle prosthetic components on braking and propulsive impulses during transtibial amputee gait. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006; 87: 1334-1339.
- 22Klute GK, Berge JS, Segal AD. Heel-region properties of prosthetic feet and shoes. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2004; 41: 535-546.
- 23Gard SA, Konz RJ. The effect of a shock-absorbing pylon on the gait of persons with unilateral transtibial amputation. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2003; 40: 109-124.
- 24Berge JS, Czerniecki JM, Klute GK. Efficacy of shock-absorbing versus rigid pylons for impact reduction in transtibial amputees based on laboratory, field, and outcome metrics. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005; 42: 795-808.
- 25Childers WL, Kistenberg RS, Gregor RJ. Pedaling asymmetries in cyclists with unilateral transtibial amputation: effect of prosthetic foot stiffness. J Appl Biomech. 2011; 27(4): 314-321.
- 26Dyer B, Woolley H. Development of high-performance transtibial cycling-specific prosthesis for the London 2012 paralympic games. Pros Orth Int. 2017; 41(5): 498-502.
- 27Ellis S, Callaway A, Dyer B. The influence of lower-limb prostheses technology on paracanoeing time-trial performance. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2018; 13(6): 568-574.
- 28Carey SI, Wernke MM, Lura DJ, Kahle JT, Dubey RV, Highsmith MJ. Golf hand prosthesis performance of transradial amputees. Pros Orth Int. 2015; 39(3): 244-249.
- 29Cooper RA. Wheelchair racing sports science: a review. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1990; 27(3): 295-312.
- 30Cooper RA, Hisaichi Ohnabe H, Hobson D. An Introduction to Rehabilitation Engineering. Taylor and Francis Group LLC; 2006: 444.
- 31Cooper RA. A perspective on the ultralight wheelchair revolution. Technol Disabil. 1996; 5: 383-392.
- 32Mason BS, Porcellato L, van der Woude LHV, Goosey-Tolfrey VL. A qualitative examination of wheelchair configuration for optimal mobility performance in wheelchair sports: a pilot study. J Rehabil Med. 2010; 42: 141-149.
- 33Mason BS, van der Woude LHV, Goosey-Tolfrey VL. The ergonomics of wheelchair configuration for optimal performance in the wheelchair court sports. Sports Med. 2013; 43: 23-38.
- 34Cooper RA, Tuakli-Wosornu YA, Henderson GV, et al. Engineering and/technology in wheelchair sport. Phys Med Rehab Clin N Am. 2018; 29: 347-369.
- 35MacLeish MS, Cooper RA, Harralson J, Ster JF. Design of a composite monocoque frame racing wheelchair. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1993; 30(2): 233-249.
- 36Cooper RA, De Luigi AJ. Adaptive sports technology and biomechanics: wheelchairs. PMR. 2014; 6: S31-S39.
- 37Burkett B. Paralympic sports medicine—current evidence in winter sport: considerations in the development of equipment standards for paralympic athletes. Clin J Sport Med. 2012; 22: 46-50.
- 38Collinger JL, Boninger ML, Koontz AM, et al. Shoulder biomechanics during the push phase of wheelchair propulsion: a multi-site study of persons with paraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 2008; 89(3): 667-676.
- 39Boninger ML, Baldwin M, Cooper RA, Koontz AM, Chan L. Manual wheelchair pushrim biomechanics and axle position. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 2000; 81(5): 608-613.
- 40Laferrier JZ, Rice I, Pearlman JP, et al. Technology to improve sports performance in wheelchair sports. Sports Technol. 2012; 5(1–2): 4-19.
10.1080/19346182.2012.663531 Google Scholar
- 41Van der Woude LHV, Bouw A, van Wegen J, et al. Seat height: effects on submaximal hand rim wheelchair performance during spinal cord injury rehabilitation. J Rehabil Med. 2009; 41: 143-149.
- 42Hughes CJ, Weimar WH, Sheth PN, Brubaker CE. Biomechanics of wheelchair propulsion as a function of seat position and user-tochair interface. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1992; 73: 263-269.
- 43Mason BS, van der Woude LHV, Tolfrey K, et al. Effects of wheel and hand-rim size on sub-maximal propulsion in wheelchair athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012; 44: 126-134.
- 44Mason BS, van der Woude LHV, Goosey-Tolfrey VL. The effect of wheel size on mobility performance in wheelchair athletes. Int J Sports Med. 2012; 33: 807-812.
- 45Guo L, Su F, An K. Effect of handrim diameter on manual wheelchair propulsion: mechanical energy and power flow analysis. Clin Biomech. 2006; 21: 107-115.
- 46van der Woude LHV, Veeger HEJ, Rozendal RH, van Ingen Schenau G, Rooth F, van Nierop P. Wheelchair racing: effects of rim diameter and speed on physiology and technique. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1988; 20: 492-500.
- 47Gayle GW, Pohlman RL, Glaser RM. Cardiorespiratory and perceptual responses to arm crank and wheelchair exercise using various handrims in male paraplegics. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1990; 61: 224-232.
- 48Boninger ML, Koontz AM, Sisto SA, et al. Pushrim biomechanics and injury prevention in spinal cord injury: recommendations based on CULP-SCI investigations. J Rehab Res Dev. 2005; 42(3 Suppl 1): 9-20.
- 49Koontz AM, Cooper RA, Boninger ML, Baldwin MA. An autoregressive modeling approach to analyzing wheelchair propulsion forces. Med Eng Phys. 2001; 23(4): 285-291.
- 50Boninger ML, Souza AL, Cooper RA, Fitzgerald SG, Koontz AM, Fay BT. Propulsion patterns and Pushrim biomechanics in manual wheelchair propulsion. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002; 83(5): 718-723.
- 51Ambrosio F, Boninger ML, Souza AL, Fitzgerald SG, Koontz AM, Cooper RA. Biomechanics and strength of manual wheelchair users. J Spinal Cord Med. 2005; 2828(5): 407-414.
10.1080/10790268.2005.11753840 Google Scholar
- 52Bakachina S, Weissland T, Brassart F, et al. Influence of wheelchair type on kinematic parameters in wheelchair rugby. Front Sports Act Living. 2022; 4: 1-9.
- 53Rietveld T, Vegter RJK, Van der Woude LH, de Groot S. The interaction between wheelchair configuration and wheeling performance in wheelchair tennis: a narrative review. Sports Biomech. 2021: 1-22.
- 54Goosey-Tolfrey VL, Moss AD. Wheelchair velocity of tennis players during propulsion with and without the use of racquets. Adapt Phys Activ Q. 2005; 22(3): 291-301. doi:10.1123/apaq.22.3.291
- 55De Groot S, Bos F, Koopman J, Hoekstra AE, Vegter RJK. Effect of holding a racket on propulsion technique of wheelchair tennis players. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2017; 27(9): 918-924. doi:10.1111/sms.12701
