Impact of the width and shape of the sliding board on design evaluation.

This study aimed to investigate how width affects the design evaluation of sliding boards with a new shape. Ten caregivers at a senior facility evaluated five types of boards every two weeks. The new shape board received high ratings as the width increased, with a SUS (System Usability Scale) score of 68.5 points (95% CI 60.6-76.4). Compared to the traditional rectangular board, which had a width of 250 mm and a thickness of 5 mm, the new shape board (with a central width of 163 mm and a thickness of 8 mm) received higher ratings by 0.68 points (95% CI 0.31-1.05)using a paired comparison method. The results of a quantitative study on the usability of sliding boards from the perspective of caregivers indicated that for similar board shapes with a length of 650 mm and a thickness of 8 mm, the evaluation increases as the width increases in the range of 130 mm to 163 mm at the center.

The EQ-5D-5L in patients admitted to a hospital in Japan with recent spinal cord injury: a descriptive study.

STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive study. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate Euro Quality of Life 5-dimensional 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) by severity level at the acute stage and discharge in patients with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: Spinal Injuries Center, Fukuoka, Japan. METHODS: Patients with traumatic SCI who completed the EQ-5D-5L instrument at the acute stage and discharge were divided into four groups according to severity (severity group G1; C1-C4 ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) A, B, and C, G2; C5-C8 AIS A, B, and C, G3; T1-S5 AIS A, B, and C, G4; all AIS D). All data were extracted from the Japan single-center study for spinal cord injury database (JSSCI-DB). RESULTS: Data were collected from 139 individuals at the acute stage and 164 individuals at discharge. In the comparison of utility score by severity in acute stage and discharge, G3 was significantly higher in discharge (0.325 versus 0.580). Utility scores by degree of severity were significantly higher in group G4 than those of G1, G2, and G3 at the acute stage. Utility scores at discharge were significantly higher in groups G3 and G4 than in G1, and there was a significant difference between groups G4 and G2. CONCLUSIONS: At each stage, the utility scores of group G4 were significantly higher than those of groups G1 and G2. Altogether, the utility scores for hospitalized patients with traumatic SCI that were indicated in this study will serve as basic data that can be used while performing spinal regeneration medical procedures in the future.