F3 , also T3 and SP3 , is a wheelchair sport classification that corresponds to the C8 neurological level. Historically, it was known as 1C Complete, and 1B Not Complete. F3 sports have functional problems related to the muscles in their throwing arms, although they have sufficient control over their fingers to grip the throwing tool normally. They have no functional trunk controls.
There are classes that are comparable in other sports. In swimming, these include S3, SB3, S4, and S5. In basketball wheelchairs, this includes 1 player point. The classification process into this class has a medical and functional classification process. This process is often sport specific.
Video F3 (classification)
Definisi
This is a wheelchair sport classification that fits the C8 neurological level. In the past, this class was known as 1C Complete, and 1B Not Complete.
In 2002, USA Track & amp; Field defines this class as, "These athletes have normal or almost normal limb function, no active stem movement, although the stem can move by pushing the action, otherwise the torso usually lies on the tucked leg, the interrupt encourages movement to driving, then having trouble continuing pushing position When braking, the luggage keeps close to the pushing position Neurological level: T1-T7. "
Neurological
Disabled Sports USA defines the neurological definition of this class in 2003 as C8. The location of lesions in different vertebrae tends to be associated with the degree of disability and functionality problems. C8 is associated with the flexor of the finger. T1 is associated with a finger kidnapper.
Anatomy
Disability Sports USA defines the definition of anatomy of this class in 2003 as, "Has full strength in elbow and wrist joints * Has full or almost full strength of finger flexion and extension * Has intrinsic functional but not normal muscle in hand (demonstrable waste ). "People with lesions in C8 have a disorder that affects the use of their hands and forearms.
People with spinal cord injuries at T6 or higher are more likely to develop Autonomic dysreflexia (AD). Sometimes it also rarely effects people with injuries in T7 and T8. This condition leads to over-activity of the autonomic nervous system, and can suddenly arise when people play sports. Some of the symptoms include nausea, high blood pressure, pulsed headache, reddening, sweating, lower heart rate or nasal congestion. If left untreated, it can cause a stroke. Players in some sports such as wheelchair rugby are encouraged to be very wary of AD symptoms.
Functional
Disabled Sports USA defines the functional definition of this class in 2003 as, "Having an almost normal grip with a non-throwing arm." They have full or close functional controls with full functional control over the muscles in their fingers, but may have problems with controls on their wrists and hands. People in this class have a total breathing capacity of 79% compared to people without disabilities.
Maps F3 (classification)
Government
In general, the classification for spine injuries and wheelchair sports is overseen by the International Wheelchair and Amputee Sports Federation (IWAS), after taking over this role after ISMWSF and ISOD's 2005 amalgamation. From the 1950s to early 2000s, the sport is handled by the International Stoke Mandeville Games Federation (ISMGF).
Some sports have a classification that is managed by other organizations. In the case of athletics, the classification is handled by IPC Athletics. The classification of rugby wheelchairs has been managed by the International Wheelchair Federation since 2010. The grass bowl is handled by the International Bowl for Disabled. Fencing wheelchair is set by IWAS Wheelchair Fencing (IWF). The International Paralympic Committee manages the classification for a number of spinal injuries and wheelchair sports including alpine skiing, biathlon, cross-country skiing, ice skating hockey, powerlifting, shooting, swimming, and wheelchairs.
Some special sports for people with disabilities, such as race run, have two regulatory bodies working together to enable different types of disabilities to participate. The running race is governed by CPISRA and IWAS, with IWAS dealing with sportsmen with spinal related defects.
Classification is also submitted at the national level or at a special level of national sport. In the United States, this has been handled by Wheelchair Sports, USA (WSUSA) who manages wheelchair, field, slalom, and long distance events. For basketball chairs in Canada, the classification is handled by Wheelchair Basketball Canada.
History
At the beginning of the history of this class, the class has a different name and is based on medical classification and originally intended for athletics. During the 1960s and 1970s, the involved classification was examined in a supine position on the examination table, where several medical classifiers often stood around the players, poking and pushing their muscles by hand and with pins. The system has no privacy protection and players are classified unprotected by privacy during medical classification or with their medical records.
During the late 1960s, people often tried to trick the classification into better classification. The group most likely to try to cheat on the classification is a wheelchair basketball player with a complete spinal cord injury located in chest transection over the spine. Beginning in the 1980s and entering the 1990s, this class began to be more defined around the functional classification than the medical ones.
Sports
Athletics
Under the IPC Athletics classification system, this class competes in F53. Classes differ from T54 because T54 sportsmen have better rod function and better function and more power in their throwing arms. Someone in this class with an additional annoyance at the elbow throwing arm they can find themselves classified as F52 instead. Athletes in this class who control good torso and mobility have advantages over athletes in the same class who have less functioning control and mobility. This functional difference can lead to different performance results in the same class, with discus throwers with more control in the class capable of throwing discs further. The wheelchair racers in this class are often much faster than their able-bodied counterparts.
Open field events for this class include shot put, discus and javelin. In pentathlon, events for this class include Shot, Javelin, 100m, Discus, 800m. They throw from a sitting position. Their javelin throws a 0.6 kilogram (Â £ 1.3) weight. The shots used by women in this class weighs less than traditional ones at 3 kilograms (6.6 pounds). In the United States, people in this class are allowed to use a binder on a hand that does not throw as a way to put yourself in a chair.
There are differences in performance and similarities between this class and other wheelchair classes. A study of javelin in 2003 found that the F3 thrower had a shoulder angle velocity similar to the F4, F5, F6, F7, F8 and F9 launchers. A 1999 study found for people in the F2, F3 and F4 classes in discussions, elbow flexion and shoulder horizontal abduction are equally important variables in the speed at which they release the discussion. For F2, F3 and F4 discuss the thrower, the discus tends to be below the shoulder height and the lower arm level is generally above the elbow height at the time of release of the discus. F2 and F4 discusses the thrower has a limited range of shoulder girdle motion. Thrower discs F2, F3 and F4 have a good sitting balance when throwing. Discus throwers F5, F6 and F7 have a larger shoulder angular velocity during discs release than the lower number classes F2, F3 and F4.
A study was conducted comparing the competitor's athletic performance at the 1984 Summer Paralympics. It was found that there was little significant difference in the performance of the spacing between women in 1A (SP1, SP2) and 1B (SP3) in club throws. It was found that there was little significant difference in the performance of the distance between men in 1A (SP1, SP2) and 1B (SP3) in the club's toss. It was found that there was little significant difference in the performance of the distance between men in 1A (SP1, SP2) and 1B (SP3) in the discus. It was found that there was little significant difference in the performance spacing between men in 1A (SP1, SP2) and 1B (SP3) in the javelin. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance within the range between men in 1A (SP1, SP2) and 1B (SP3) at the shooting site. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance among women in 1A (SP1, SP2) and 1B (SP3) within 60 meters. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance at the time between men in 1A (SP1, SP2) and 1B (SP3) within 60 meters. It was found that there was a slight significant difference in performance among women in 1A (SP1, SP2) and 1B (SP3) in slalom. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance within the range between women in 1B (SP3) and 1C (SP3, SP4) at the shooting site. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance within the time between women in 1B (SP3) and 1C (SP3, SP4) on the 60-meter dashboard. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance spacing between women in 1A (SP1, SP2), 1B (SP3) and 1C (SP3, SP4) in the discus. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance within the range between women at 1A (SP1, SP2), 1B (SP3) and 1C (SP3, SP4) on club throws. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance within the time between women in 1C (SP3, SP4) and 2 (SP4) in the 60 m dashboard. It was found that there was little significant difference in the performance of the distance between men in 1C (SP3, SP4) and 2 (SP4) in shot put. It was found that there was a slight significant difference in performance within the time between men in 1C (SP3, SP4) and 2 (SP4) in slalom. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance spacing between women in 1C (SP3, SP4), 2 (SP4) and 3 (SP4, SP5) in the javelin. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance within the time between women in 1C (SP3, SP4), 2 (SP4) and 3 (SP4, SP5) at 60 meters.
Bicycling
F3 sports can participate in cycling. Competitors of this class compete in H3. This class is divided into two subclasses, both of which can be classified into SP3 cyclists. H3.1 cyclists of this are crippled with disorders associated with complete lesions from T1 to T3. H3.2 cyclists are paraplegics with disorders associated with complete lesions from T4 to T10. Factoring is used in cycling to allow multiple classes and genders to compete against each other. UCI is factoring for 2014 with H4 and H5 as 100% on factoring. Against this factorization, H4 women were 87.71%. When H3 men are set at 100%, H4 women are 90.19%. In trajectory events, SP3 men in H3 are significantly faster than SP2 women in H2. Female SP3 about 4 seconds faster than SP4 women per lap. SP3 and SP4 men each within 1 second of any other time per lap.
Rowing
Rowing is one of the sports options open to people in this class. Currently, people with spinal injuries at T12 level compete in the US. This class is for people who use their arms and shoulders to paddle. The rulers of this class may be able to hold the oars with their hands but have little control over their hands. In 1991, the first internationally accepted adaptive rowing classification system was established and put into use. People from this class were originally classified as Q2, for people with lesions in C7-T1.
Swimming
Swimmers in this class compete in a number of IPC pool classes. These include S3, SB3, S4 and S5. Swimming classification is based on the total points system, with various functional and medical tests used as part of the formula for assigning classes. Part of this test involves the scale of the Integrated Medical Research Council (MRC). For the top bar extension, the full C8 is 0 points.
People in SB3 tend to be incomplete tetraplegics under C7, complete paraplegics around T1 - T5, or complete paraplegics in T1 - T8 with surgical rods inserted into their spine from T4 to T6. This rod affects the lumbar function and its balance. S4 swimmers tend to tetraplegics with complete lesions under C8 but have good finger extensions, or those incomplete tetraplegics below C7. This S4 swimmer can use their hands and wrists to gain power in the water but has some limitations due to lack of full finger control. Since they do not have minimal rod control, they have a pull of the foot. Start them most often in the water, and they make the rounds and start by pushing the walls using their hands. S5 swimmers with spinal cord injuries tend to be paraplegic complete with lesions below T1 to T8, or imperfect tetraplegics below C8 that have proper rod control. These swimmers have full use of their arms and are able to use their hands, hands and fingers to get a boost in the swim capture phase. Because they have minimal rod control, their hips tend to be slightly lower in the water and they have a pull of the foot. They either start in the water or start from a sitting position. They use their hands to take turns.
To swim with the most severe handicap in the 1984 Summer Paralympics, a floating device and a swimming coach in a pool next to a Paralympic rival was allowed. A study was conducted comparing the competitor's athletic performance at the 1984 Summer Paralympics. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance time between women in 1A (SP1, SP2), 1B (SP3), and 1C (SP3, SP4) in 25m breaststroke. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance time between women at 1A, 1B, and 1C in the 25m backstroke. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance time between women at 1A, 1B, and 1C in the 25m freestyle. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance time between men in 1A, 1B, and 1C in the 25m backstroke. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance time between men in 1A, 1B, and 1C in the 25m freestyle. It was found that there was little significant difference in performance time between men in 1A, and 1B in breaststroke 25m.
Basketball chairs
The original basketball wheel classification system in 1966 had 5 classes: A, B, C, D, S. Each class is worth so many points. A is worth 1, B, and C is worth 2. D and S is 3 points. One team can have a maximum of 12 points on the floor. This system is used for the 1968 Summer Paralympics. Class A for the complete T1-T9. Class B for T1-T9 is not complete. Class C is for the complete T10-L2. Class D for T10-L2 is incomplete. Class S is for Cauda equina paralysis. This class will be part of Class A or Class B.
From 1969 to 1973, the classification system drafted by Dr. Bedwell Australia is used. The system uses several muscle tests to determine which classes are incompletely paralyzed to be classified. It uses point system based on the ISMGF classification system. Class IA, IB and IC are worth 1 point. Class II for people with lesions between T1-T5 and unbalanced is also worth 1 point. Class III for people with lesions in T6-T10 and have a fair balance worth 1 point. Class IV is for people with lesions in T11-L3 and good stem muscles. They are worth 2 points. Class V is for people with lesions on L4 to L5 with good leg muscles. Class IV is for people with S1-S4 lesions with good leg muscles. Class V and IV are 3 points. The Daniels/Worthington muscle test is used to determine who is in class V and who grade IV. Paraplegics with 61 to 80 points on this scale are not eligible. A team can have a maximum of 11 points on the floor. This system is designed to prevent people with less severe spinal cord injury, and has no medical base in most cases. This class is IB or IC.
In 1982, the basketball wheel finally moved to an international functional classification system. While traditional medical systems where spinal cord injury lies could be part of the classification, it is only a component of the advisory. This class will be Class 1 at 1 or 1.5 points. They will probably be 1 player points under the current classification system.
Wheelchair wheel
The wheelchair fence is another sport open to the people in this class. Generally, people in this class are classified as 1B. They lack flexibility in their fingers, and weapons must be tied into their hands. For IWF international sanctions competition, classes are combined. 1A and 1B are combined, competing as Category C.
Other sports
One of the sports available to people in this class is archery. People in this class compete in ARW1 for people who lose arm function. They can also be ARW2. This class is for people who have limited good rod function and normal function in their arms. These include a paralyzed archer, while ARW1 includes a tetraplegic archer. The people in this class participate can participate in skiing. In the United States, domestic competition uses a different classification than is used internationally. Two groups are used instead of LW10 to LW12. Group 1 is for people from T5 to T10. Group 2 is for people with lesions above T5. Table tennis is another option. Players in this class compete typically compete in Class 5, although it largely depends on the functionality of other lower body parts. This may cause them to be incorporated into Class 3, Class 4 or Class 5. Cutouts for Class 5 usually depend on the functionality of the hip.
Ten pin bowling is another sport that is open to people in this class, where they compete in TPB8. People in this class do not have more than 70 points for functionality, have normal throw arms to throw and use a wheelchair. This class is also eligible to participate in electric wheelchair hockey. This sport has one class and is open to anyone with a spinal cord injury above T1.
Classify
Classification is often sport-specific, and has two parts: the medical classification process and the functional classification process.
Medical classifications for wheelchair sports may consist of medical records sent to medical classifiers at international sports federations. Athlete physicians may be required to provide extensive medical information including medical diagnosis and loss of functionality related to their condition. This includes if the condition is progressive or stable, if it is a condition that is acquired or congenital. This may include requests for information about future anticipated medical care. This may also include requests for any medication used. Documentation that may be required include x-rays, ASIA scale results, or Ashworth Modified Scale scores.
One standard way to assess functional classification is the bench test, used in swimming, grass bowls and wheelchair fences. Using Adapted Research Council (MRC) measurements, muscle strength was tested using bench press for various spinal cord injuries associated with muscles assessed on a scale of 0 to 5. A 0 is for no muscle contraction. A 1 is for flicker or trace contraction in muscle. A 2 is for active movement in muscle with gravity removed. A 3 is a movement against gravity. A 4 is for active motion against gravity with several obstacles. A 5 for normal muscle movement.
The wheelchair fence classification has 6 tests for functionality during classification, along with bench test. Each test gives 0 to 3 points. A 0 is without function. A 1 is for minimum movement. A 2 is for fair movement but weak execution. A 3 is for normal execution. The first test is an extension of the dorsal muscles. The second test is for the lateral balance of the upper limb. The third test measures the extension of the lumbar muscle stem. The fourth test measures the balance of the lateral while holding the weapon. The fifth test measures the movement of the stem in the intermediate position recorded in tests one and three, and tests two and four. The sixth test measures bar extension involving the lumbar and dorsal muscles while leaning forward at a 45-degree angle. In addition, a bench test should be performed.
References
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments