While finding ways to improve adaptive technology is the goal of this investigation, doing so with the rules of the sport in mind is imperative. This is often not trivial, because with the many different variations of disabilities and capabilities that adaptive rowers possess, the rules regarding equipment have become rather constrictive. These rules can be found in the “Boats and Construction” section of World Rowing’s 2012 Adaptive Rowing Regulations. In this section, the required qualities and locations of straps is given, which is relatively specific, requiring non-elastic material, no mechanical buckles, easy-release mechanisms, and straps around the trunk or legs depending on the class of athlete. However, within the clause is a rule that states that any other straps may be added or modified as long as the changes are within the rules laid out above. This ensures that the mission of the present study is plausible.

 

The article “Rib stress fracture in a male adaptive rower from the arms and shoulders sport class: case report” (Smoljanovic, Bojanic, Pollock, and Radonic) reported an incident of an adaptive rower who endured a stress fracture in his rib and discussed the likely causes for this case and cases similar to it. Because the present study is focused on equipment-based injuries, this case study provides a valuable example. They pointed to the chest strap required of Arms and Shoulders class (AS) rowers as the cause for their subject’s injury to his left 9th rib. They also were able to expand on this specific example, using their theory about the harmful rigidity of the strap and the reasoning for the rule requiring it to explain the prevalence of chest injuries in the AS group. Not only will the current study address this issue and seek a solution, but it will also use the methods that these researchers used to identify a greater problem from one case study.

 

A number of more general injuries can be found in the rowing section of Yves Vanlandewijck’s The Paralympic Athlete, and the adaptive rowing section of Niels H. Secher and Stefanos Volianitis’s Handbook of Sports Medicine and Science: Rowing. Hosea and Hannafin’s "Rowing Injuries" and Perrin’s "Rowing Injuries" also discuss the epidemiology of injuries that arise often in rowing.

 

After gathering all of the information I could find on prior cases of adaptive and non-adaptive rowing injuries, I will be conducting some primary research in the form of interviews and a survey. Therefore, knowing the proper terminology to use when conducting my primary research is very important. Reading about the sport’s history in the preliminary stages of my research using sources such as The Paralympic Athlete was somewhat helpful, but the best source for terminology and etiquette information was "Amputee Athletes, Part 1: Foundational Knowledge." In the article, authors define the terminology used by and for disabled athletes, identify the classifications of paralympic athletes, discuss the best treatment approaches, and describe the phenomenon of phantom pain. Although I may not need all of the detailed information on trainer-patient processes, I do hope to become more knowledgeable about disabled athletes' condition. And, as the author said, "by understanding the terminology relevant to this population, ATs will be more capable of interacting with the athlete and other healthcare providers," which is exactly what I aim to use this source to learn how to do.

After gathering primary and secondary research, I will have a great understanding of common rowing injuries, what has been thought to cause them, and attempts that have been made to fix these problems. I may even have ideas, myself, as to how some injuries could be fixed within the laws of the sport. However, I also want to discuss the issue that was brought up in “The Politics and Policy of Inclusion and Technology in Paralympic Sport: Beyond Pistorius”: can technology be introduced into adaptive sports without creating unfair, unhuman advantages? I do not expect to answer this question as the focus of my paper, but I would like to acknowledge the problem’s presence, leave readers with something to ponder over, and give future researchers another direction to take.