METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional survey using data from multinational badminton federations. The study participants were athletes registered in the Para Badminton Classification Master List of the Badminton World Federation (BWF). The main study outcome is the WHO Quality of Life-Disability Questionnaire (WHOQOL-DIS).
RESULTS: There were 1,385 (aged 36 years old, IQR 18 years old) registrants on the master list. Respondents totaled 170. Only 137 (65% were males) were included in the analysis after excluding those with missing data (Europe 40%, Asia 30%, others 30%). Following the results of factor analysis, the original Athletic Identity Measure Scale (AIMS) was separated into self-identity (SI) and AIMS-modified. SI, AIMS-modified, the BRS and the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) were all scored above average. The AIMS-modified scores of Europeans were significantly lower than those of other non-Asians (U = 757.000, P < 0.05). BRS was statistically higher among those with acquired disabilities (median: 3.33) compared to those with congenital disabilities (median: 3.0) (U = 1,717.000, Z = -2.711, P < 0.05) and among Europeans (median: 3.3) compared to Asians (median: 3.0) (U = 704.500, P < 0.05). The regression model explained 32% of the variability in quality of life (QOL) with five significant predictors. The SWLS (β = 0.307, P = 0.01), BRS (β = 0.269, P = 0.01), full-time employment (β = 0.191, P = 0.05) and being female (β = 0.162, P = 0.05) all had a positive effect on QOL, but not the AIMS (-0.228, P = 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The results show that the athletes' resilience, satisfaction with life and identity vary across regions. Furthermore, satisfaction with life, employment and gender were found to be significant predictors of athletes' QOL.
METHODS: Data were collected from 137 para-badminton athletes (male: 65.0% and female: 35.0%). Self-reported measures were used to assess the participants' autonomy, resilience and life satisfaction levels.
RESULTS: A structural equation model analysis was performed; the model had sufficient fit indices (comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.94, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.06, standardised root mean square residual [SRMR] = 0.07). The findings showed that autonomy had a significant effect on resilience (β = 0.32, P = 0.001). Further, resilience had a significant effect on life satisfaction (β = 0.19, P = 0.011) and significantly mediated the effect of autonomy on life satisfaction (β = 021, P = 0.033).
CONCLUSION: This study revealed that autonomy fosters resilience among athletes, in turn allowing them to achieve greater life satisfaction. Therefore, society and sport communities should actively seek ways to improve the autonomy and resilience levels of athletes with disabilities.