OtherAmerican journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation2025

Expert Opinion on Handcycling Classification: A Delphi Study Based on Scientific Evidence.

Rafael Muchaxo, Sonja de Groot, Lucas van der Woude and 3 others

PMID 40874911

WHAT IT FOUND

Handcycling experts agreed classification should assess upper-limb, shoulder, and lower-limb function.

They did not agree on handgrip class separation, trunk strapping, or footrest rules for athletes with partial lower-limb function.

Key findings

01The panel reached consensus that upper-limb function should be included in H1 and H2 classification (91%), and that shoulder function should be assessed with elbow function (92%).

02The panel reached consensus that lower-limb function should be assessed in recumbent handcycling (81%), and that athletes with normal lower-limb function should not push against the footrest when competing with athletes with impaired lower limbs (79%).

03The panel reached consensus that trunk flexion is not a significant determinant of recumbent handcycling performance (90%) and that H3 or H4 allocation should not be based solely on trunk function and stability (95%).

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they found

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The panel was mostly men, with 40 of 53 members male. The panel was mostly from Europe, with 33 of 53 members from Europe. Fifty-three members started, and forty-four completed rounds two and three. Members could choose not able to answer, and those choices were excluded from consensus calculation. The study reports expert consensus, not patient outcomes or tested classification rules.

Declared interests

The paper says the UCI supported recruitment and communication. It does not report a funding source or author conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read these consensus percentages as evidence that classification changes improve fairness or performance. They are expert opinions about rules, not tested interventions.

Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →


The study

Participants
53 panel members; 44 completed rounds two and three
Certainty of evidence
Low

Browse

    Cite

    Rafael Muchaxo, Sonja de Groot, Lucas van der Woude, et al. Expert Opinion on Handcycling Classification: A Delphi Study Based on Scientific Evidence. American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation. 2025.

    Read the original — we summarise, we never replace the paper.