Assessment of Visual Function and Performance in Paralympic Judo for Athletes with Vision Impairment.

SIGNIFICANCE: Paralympic judo currently requires all athletes to compete against each other in one class irrespective of their level of vision impairment (VI). Recent evidence suggests that multiple classes are required to enhance fairness, yet it remains unclear how many classes are necessary and what vision tests should be used to define those classes. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to quantify the relationship between vision and performance in judo for individuals with VI. The results were expected to inform the development of evidence-based criteria to structure Paralympic judo competition. METHODS: The visual function of 53 elite VI judokas was assessed using a test battery that included tests of visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity, light sensitivity, depth perception, motion perception, visual search, and central visual field. Performance was assessed by measuring the ratio of fights won across all competitions the participants took part in in the 2 years before and after vision testing. Pearson correlation coefficients and decision tree analyses were used to determine the relationship between vision and performance. Partial correlations were also conducted to determine the unique ability of each measure of visual function to predict judo performance. RESULTS: Visual acuity was the best predictor of judo performance and remained the only visual function related to performance when controlling for correlations between VA and other visual functions. Decision tree analyses suggested to split athletes into two groups for more legitimate competition, using a cutoff point around 2.6 logMAR. Within each of the two resulting subgroups, no correlations remained between any of the visual functions and performance. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that VI judo competition should be split into separate categories for partially sighted and functionally blind athletes. The inclusion of visual functions in addition to VA does not improve the ability to predict performance in VI judo.

Expert opinion on classification for footballers with vision impairment: Towards evidence-based minimum impairment criteria.

In Para sport, the aim of classification is to minimize the impact of impairment on the outcome of competition. Despite requirements of the International Paralympic Committee Athlete Classification Code for classification to be evidence-based and sport-specific, sports for athletes with VI, including football, use the same generic classes across almost all sports. The aim of this study was to consult with experts to establish the needs and challenges for developing a code-compliant system of classification for VI football. A panel of 18 experts with international experience in VI football (16.8 ± 10.2 years) took part in a three-round Delphi study using online surveys. Results showed that the panel did not think that the current system completely fulfils the aim of classification. The panel identified measures of visual function they considered to be relevant but are not currently measured during classification including dynamic acuity, depth and motion perception, and contrast and light sensitivity. Moreover, they identified technical skills such as ball control, dribbling and passing, as well as perceptual-cognitive skills, as most likely to be affected by vision impairment. Findings outline the need for change and offer a framework for future research to develop an evidence-based classification for VI football.

Evidence-based Classification in Track Athletics for Athletes with a Vision Impairment: A Delphi Study.

SIGNIFICANCE: The Delphi analysis presented here highlights the need for a sport-specific evidence-based classification system for track athletics for athletes with a vision impairment (VI). This system may differ for different race distances. Further research is required to develop a useful test battery of vision tests for classification. The issue of intentional misrepresentation during classification needs particular attention. PURPOSE: At present, athletes with VI are placed into competition classes developed on the basis of legal definitions of VI. The International Paralympic Committee Athlete Classification Code states that all sports should have their own classification system designed to reflect the (visual) demands of that individual sport. This project gathered expert opinion on the specific requirements for an evidence-based sport-specific classification system for VI track athletics and to identify any particular issues within track athletics that require further research into their impact on sport performance. METHODS: A three-round Delphi review was conducted with a panel of 17 people with expertise in VI track athletics. RESULTS: The panel agreed that the current classification system in VI track athletics does not completely minimize the impact of impairment on competition outcome, highlighting the need for improvements. There was clear agreement that the existing measures of vision may fail to adequately reflect the type of vision loss that would impact running performance, with additional measures required. Intentional misrepresentation, where athletes "cheat" on classification tests, remains a serious concern. CONCLUSIONS: The panel has identified measures of vision and performance that will inform the development of an evidence-based classification system by better understanding the relationship between VI and performance in track athletics. Issues such as the use of guides and whether the current class system was equitable gave rise to differing opinions within the panel, with these varying across the different running distances.

Rifle Shooting for Athletes With Vision Impairment: Does One Class Fit All?

Revised evidence-based classification criteria introduced for shooting for athletes with vision impairment (VI shooting) suggest that athletes with impaired contrast sensitivity (CS) and visual acuity (VA) should be eligible for inclusion in the sport but should all eligible athletes compete against each other in the same "class" or is more than one class necessary? Twenty-five elite VI shooting athletes took part in the study. Two measures of visual function were assessed under standardized conditions: VA (using an ETDRS logMAR letter chart, and/or a BRVT chart) and CS (using both a Pelli-Robson chart and a Mars number chart). Shooting performance, in both prone and standing events, was measured during an international VI shooting competition. Fourteen of the 25 athletes had measurable VA, and for CS, 8 athletes had measurable function with the Pelli-Robson chart and 13 with the Mars chart. The remaining athletes had function not numerically measurable by the charts and were considered to have no residual vision. There was no indication that shooting performance varied with visual function, and individuals that had residual vision had no advantage over those without vision for either prone or standing shooting. The modifications made to VI shooting, including the use of auditory tones to guide the gun barrel, appear to have successfully rendered the sport equitable for all eligible athletes. Only one class is necessary for athletes. An improved method of measuring CS in athletes with profound VI would be advantageous.

The Development of Evidence-Based Classification of Vision Impairment in Judo: A Delphi Study.

Objective: Most para-sports group athletes into "classes" to compete against others with similar activity limitations. Judokas with vision impairment (VI) instead all compete in the same class irrespective of their level of impairment. There is considerable controversy whether this approach represents a legitimate way to structure judo competition. The aim of this study was to establish expert opinion on the requirements for an evidence-based classification system for VI judo. Methods: A panel of 18 athletes, coaches, and administrators participated in a three-round Delphi review process. Expert opinions were canvased for a large range of issues related to classification in judo. Between rounds, results were summarized and further questions were asked on topics where consensus was not reached across experts. Results: The panel expressed that: (i) blind and partially sighted athletes should not compete against each other in the same class; (ii) additional measures of visual function might be needed to accurately evaluate an athlete's impairment; (iii) the minimum impairment criteria (MIC) should represent a more severe level of impairment to ensure that all those included possess a level of VI that indeed decreases performance in judo; and (iv) legitimate competition could be undermined by some athletes intentionally underperforming on classification tests. The panel identified six additional measures of visual function which are not currently measured but are likely to impact judo performance, and six aspects of judo performance which are most likely impacted by VI. Conclusion: Experts in the field of VI judo expressed a need to change the manner in which VI judokas are classified. This study outlines a model for establishing the impairment-performance relationship and guides the development of evidence-based classification for VI judo.

Contrast Sensitivity Is a Significant Predictor of Performance in Rifle Shooting for Athletes With Vision Impairment.

Purpose: In order to develop an evidence-based, sport-specific minimum impairment criteria (MIC) for the sport of vision-impaired (VI) shooting, this study aimed to determine the relative influence of losses in visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) on shooting performance. Presently, VA but not CS is used to determine eligibility to compete in VI shooting. Methods: Elite able-sighted athletes (n = 27) shot under standard conditions with their habitual vision, and with their vision impaired by the use of simulation spectacles (filters which reduce both VA and CS) and refractive blur (lenses which reduce VA with less effect on CS). Habitual shooting scores were used to establish a cut-off in order to determine when shooting performance was 'below expected' in the presence of vision impairment. Logistic regression and decision tree analyses were then used to assess the relationship between visual function and shooting performance. Results: Mild reductions in VA and/or CS did not alter shooting performance, with greater reductions required for shooting performance to fall below habitual levels (below 87% of normalized performance). Stepwise logistic regression selected CS as the most significant predictor of shooting performance, with VA subsequently improving the validity of the model. In an unconstrained decision tree analysis, CS was selected as the sole criterion (80%) for predicting 'below expected' shooting score. Conclusion: Shooting performance is better predicted by losses in CS than by VA. Given that it is not presently tested during classification, the results suggest that CS is an important measure to include in testing for the classification of vision impairment for athletes competing in VI shooting.

The Level of Vision Necessary for Competitive Performance in Rifle Shooting: Setting the Standards for Paralympic Shooting with Vision Impairment.

The aim of this study was to investigate the level of vision impairment (VI) that would reduce performance in shooting; to guide development of entry criteria to visually impaired (VI) shooting. Nineteen international-level shooters without VI took part in the study. Participants shot an air rifle, while standing, toward a regulation target placed at the end of a 10 m shooting range. Cambridge simulation glasses were used to simulate six different levels of VI. Visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) were assessed along with shooting performance in each of seven conditions of simulated impairment and compared to that with habitual vision. Shooting performance was evaluated by calculating each individual's average score in every level of simulated VI and normalizing this score by expressing it as a percentage of the baseline performance achieved with habitual vision. Receiver Operating Characteristic curves were constructed to evaluate the ability of different VA and CS cut-off criteria to appropriately classify these athletes as achieving 'expected' or 'below expected' shooting results based on their performance with different levels of VA and CS. Shooting performance remained relatively unaffected by mild decreases in VA and CS, but quickly deteriorated with more moderate losses. The ability of visual function measurements to classify shooting performance was good, with 78% of performances appropriately classified using a cut-off of 0.53 logMAR and 74% appropriately classified using a cut-off of 0.83 logCS. The current inclusion criteria for VI shooting (1.0 logMAR) is conservative, maximizing the chance of including only those with an impairment that does impact performance, but potentially excluding some who do have a genuine impairment in the sport. A lower level of impairment would include more athletes who do have a genuine impairment but would potentially include those who do not actually have an impairment that impacts performance in the sport. An impairment to CS could impact performance in the sport and might be considered in determining eligibility to take part in VI competition.