Background:The training of a parabadminton athlete must cover the technical, physical, tactical and psychological aspects required by the sport. It is important to know these
variables throughout the training, especially in the moments before the competition to maximize the athlete’s performance. So the purpose of this study was to characterize the psychological profile of
Brazilian parabadminton athletes in a pre-competition period.
Methods:We evaluated 11 male parabadminton athletes in pre-competition period. They had a mean age of 33.4 (SD ± 11.6) years and practiced the sport for nearly four years. The
instruments used to evaluate their psychologicalprofile were: Sport CompetitionAnxiety Test (SCAT), Profile of Mood States (POMS) and the World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQL-Bref). The
evaluations were performed by the same examiner during the training. The study was approved by the Unicamp Ethics Committee. Descriptive statistics were used to explore the database collected. To
analyze the characteristics presented in the POMS questionnaire, we usedthe normative values for athletes proposed by Terry. To analyze the association between the answers given in different
questionnaires we used the Pearson correlation coefficient. The significance level was set at p <0.05.
Results:We found that the athletes showedthe "iceberg" profile in POMS questionnaire, however the tension domain showed higher scores (13.4±5.6) when compared to the expected by
athletes (5.7). When analyzed the responses in the WHOQOL, the athletes had the highest scores in the quality of life domain (4.3±0.5) and lower scores in the physical domain (3.9±0.6). Analyzing the
correlation coefficients between all questionnaires we foundthat SCAT showed a positive correlation with severalPOMS domains: tension (r=0.75, p<0.01), depression (r=0.62, p=0.04), aggression (r=0.63,
p=0.03)and confusion (r=0.70, p=0.01). Moreover, we found that the psychological domain of WHOQOL presented a proportional inverse relationship with POMS domains, the higher the values intension
(r=-0.85, p<0.01), depression(r=-0.70, p=0.01), aggression(r=-0.73, p<0.01), fatigue (r=-0.66, p=0.02) and confusion(r=-0.81, p<0.01), thelower the scores in the psychological domain.
Conclusions:Athletes showed a good capacity for action and reaction observed by the results of the POMS. Lower scores in physical domain and higher scores tension shows up an
imbalance of energy to share, an aspect that can be developedby members of the technical staff. As for quality of life, it is concluded that athletes are able to perform their activities properly.