F4 (classification)
F4, also T4 and SP4, is a wheelchair sport classification that corresponds to the neurological level T1- T7. Historically, it was known as 1C Incomplete, 2 Complete, or Upper 3 Complete. People in this class have normal upper limb function, and functional issues with muscles below the nipple line.
There are comparable F4 classes in a number of sports. For athletics, these are T54 and F54. In cycling, these are H4 or H5. Swimming classes include S3, SB3, S4 and S5. The process for classification into this class has a medical and functional classification process. This process is often sport specific.
Definition
This is wheelchair sport classification that corresponds to the neurological level T1- T7. In the past, this class was known as 1C Incomplete, 2 Complete, or Upper 3 Complete.In 2002, USA Track & Field defined this class as, "These athletes have normal upper limb function as well as backward movement of the trunk, often with rotation movements of the trunk. They may use the trunk movements to steer around curves, and usually do not have to interrupt the pushing stroke rate around curves. When stopping quickly, the trunk moves toward an upright position. They are able to use their abdominals for power, particularly when starting, but also when pushing. Neurological level: T8-S2."
Neurological
Disabled Sports USA defined the neurological definition of this class in 2003 as T1 - T7. The location of lesions on different vertebrae tend to be associated with disability levels and functionality issues. T1 is associated with finger abductors. T6 is associated with abdominal innervation beginning.Anatomical
People with a lesion at T6 have an impairment that effects the muscles in their body below the nipple line.Functional
F4 sportspeople may have good sitting balance and some impairment in their dominant hand. Disabled Sports USA defined the functional definition of this class in 2003 as, "Have no sitting balance. Usually hold onto part of the chair while throwing. Complete Class 2 and upper Class 3 Athletes have normal upper limbs. They can hold the throwing implement normally. They have no functional trunk movements.Incomplete 1C Athletes who have trunk movements, with hand function like F3." People in this class have a total respiratory capacity of 85% compared to people without a disability.People with spinal injuries at T6 or higher are more likely to develop Autonomic dysreflexia. It also sometimes rarely effects people with injuries at T7 and T8. The condition causes over-activity of the autonomic nervous system, and can suddenly onset when people are playing sports. Some of the symptoms include nausea, high blood pressure, a pounding headache, flushed face, profuse sweating, a lower heart rate or a nasal congestion. If left untreated, it can cause a stroke. Players in some sports like wheelchair rugby are encouraged to be particularly on guard for AD symptoms.
Governance
In general, classification for spinal cord injuries and wheelchair sport is overseen by International Wheelchair and Amputee Sports Federation, having taken over this role following the 2005 merger of ISMWSF and ISOD. From the 1950s to the early 2000s, wheelchair sport classification was handled International Stoke Mandeville Games Federation.Some sports have classification managed by other organizations. In the case of athletics, classification is handled by IPC Athletics. Wheelchair rugby classification has been managed by the International Wheelchair Rugby Federation since 2010. Lawn bowls is handled by International Bowls for the Disabled. Wheelchair fencing is governed by IWAS Wheelchair Fencing. The International Paralympic Committee manages classification for a number of spinal cord injury and wheelchair sports including alpine skiing, biathlon, cross country skiing, ice sledge hockey, powerlifting, shooting, swimming, and wheelchair dance.
Some sports specifically for people with disabilities, like race running, have two governing bodies that work together to allow different types of disabilities to participate. Race running is governed by both the CPISRA and IWAS, with IWAS handling sportspeople with spinal cord related disabilities.
Classification is also handled at the national level or at the national sport specific level. In the United States, this has been handled by Wheelchair Sports, USA who managed wheelchair track, field, slalom, and long-distance events. For wheelchair basketball in Canada, classification is handled by Wheelchair Basketball Canada.
History
Early on in this classes history, the class had a different name and was based on medical classification and originally intended for athletics. During the 1960s and 1970s, classification involved being examined in a supine position on an examination table, where multiple medical classifiers would often stand around the player, poke and prod their muscles with their hands and with pins. The system had no built in privacy safeguards and players being classified were not insured privacy during medical classification nor with their medical records.During the late 1960s, people oftentimes tried to cheat classification to get in classified more favorably. The group most likely to try to cheat at classification were wheelchair basketball players with complete spinal cord injuries located at the high thoracic transection of the spine. Starting in the 1980s and going into the 1990s, this class began to be more defined around functional classification instead of a medical one.
Sports
Athletics
Under the IPC Athletics classification system, this class competes in T54 and F54. Field events open to this class have included shot put, discus and javelin. In pentathlon, the events for this class have included Shot, Javelin, 200m, Discus, 1500m.Athletes in this class who good trunk control and mobility have an advantage over athletes in the same class who have less functional trunk control and mobility. This functional difference can cause different performance results within the same class, with discus throwers with more control in a class able to throw the discus further. Wheelchair racers in this class frequently are much faster than their able-bodied counterparts.
F4 athletes throw from a seated position, and use a javelin that weighs. The shot put used by women in this class weighs less than the traditional one at.
There are performance differences and similarities between this class and other wheelchair classes. A study of javelin throwers in 2003 found that F4 throwers have angular speeds of the shoulder girdle similar to that of F3 to F9 throwers. For people in the F2, F3 and F4 classes in the discus, elbow flexion and shoulder horizontal abduction are equally important variables in the speed at which they release the discus. For F2, F3 and F4 discus throwers, the discus tends to be below shoulder height and the forearm level is generally above elbow height at the moment of release of the discus. F2 and F4 discus throwers have limited shoulder girdle range of motion. F2 to F4 discus throwers have good sitting balance while throwing. F5, F6 and F7 discus throwers have greater angular speed of the shoulder girdle during release of the discus than the lower number classes of F2, F3 and F4. F2 and F4 discus throwers have greater average angular forearm speed than F5 to F8 throwers. F2 and F4 speed is caused by use of the elbow flexion to compensate for the shoulder flexion advantage of F5 to F8 throwers.
A study of was done comparing the performance of athletics competitors at the 1984 Summer Paralympics. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between women in 1B and 1C in the shot put. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between women in 1B and 1C in the 60 meter dash. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between women in 1A, 1B and 1C in the discus. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between women in 1A, 1B and 1C in the club throw. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between women in 1C and 2 in the 60 m dash. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between men in 1C and 2 in the shot put. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between men in 1C and 2 in the slalom. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between women in 1C, 2 and 3 in the javelin. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between women in 1C, 2 and 3 in the 60 meters. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between women in 2 and 3 in the discus. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between women in 2 and 3 in the shot put. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between women in 2 and 3 in the 60 meters. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between women in 2 and 3 in the 200 meters. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between women in 2 and 3 in the 400 meters. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between women in 2 and 3 in the slalom. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between men in 2 and 3 in the discus. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between men in 2 and 3 in the javelin. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between men in 2 and 3 in the shot put. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between men in 2 and 3 in the 100 meters. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between men in 2 and 3 in the 200 meters. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between men in 2 and 3 in the 400 meters. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between women in 2, 3 and 4 in the discus. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between men in 2, 3 and 4 in the 100 meters. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between women in 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 in the discus. It found there was little significant difference in performance in time between men in 3, 4, 5 and 6 in the 200 meters. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between men in 3 and 4 in the javelin. It found there was little significant difference in performance in distance between men in 3 and 4 in the shot put.