Objective. To explore the effectiveness of an ergonomics approach in the evaluation of different sports wheelchair configurations for the optimisation of mobility performance specific to the wheelchair court sports.

Major content of paper. Evidence based research into the effects on wheelchair configuration on mobility performance have predominantly focused on daily life wheelchair propulsion. Translating the findings of these investigations to inform the wheelchair configurations of elite athletes from the wheelchair court sports are unadvisable. Rear-wheel camber and wheel size are two prominent areas of a sports wheelchairs configuration, yet the effects of manipulating both these areas on aspects of mobility performance are not well understood, even by highly trained athletes. The lack of empirical research specific to the wheelchair court sports places an emphasis on trial and error and subjective perceptions when configuring a new sports wheelchair. From an ergonomics perspective this is unlikely to optimise the efficiency, safety/health, comfort and performance of sports wheelchair propulsion for these athletes. To effectively evaluate the ergonomics of different camber and wheel size settings, a multidisciplinary approach is a necessity, whereby a combination of biomechanical and physiological analyses are conducted in both laboratory and field environments.

Results. Making standardised adjustments to sport specific degrees of camber (15° - 24°) and wheel size (24" - 26") demonstrated that such manipulations clearly affect the ergonomics of sub-maximal and maximal effort propulsion in highly trained athletes. During sub-maximal constant velocity propulsion on a motor driven treadmill, greater camber and smaller wheels increased the external power output, oxygen uptake and heart rate responses. Hand-rim kinetic data also revealed that smaller wheels required a larger magnitude of force to be applied in order to maintain the constant velocity. During maximal effort, overground propulsion in a series of sports specific field tests, 18° camber was shown to improve linear sprinting performance compared to greater camber (24°) and manoeuvrability performance compared to reduced camber (15°). Larger 26" wheels also improved maximal linear sprinting performance, without negatively affecting initial acceleration or manoeuvrability compared to smaller wheels.

Conclusion. These investigations revealed that larger camber (24°) and smaller wheels (24") appeared unfavourable from an ergonomics perspective due to the increased physiological demand and impaired linear sprinting performance evoked. These results may offer basic guidelines relating to camber and wheel size selection for young and/or inexperienced athletes, who have not previously been through the configuration process. However, since one setting is unlikely to be optimal for all individuals, elite experienced athletes may benefit from more specific “one-off” case studies to identify their optimal settings.