Participatory Action Design and Engineering of Powered Personal Transfer System for Wheelchair Users: Initial Design and Assessment.

Caregivers that assist with wheelchair transfers are susceptible to back pain and occupational injuries. The study describes a prototype of the powered personal transfer system (PPTS) consisting of a novel powered hospital bed and a customized Medicare Group 2 electric powered wheelchair (EPW) working together to provide a no-lift solution for transfers. The study follows a participatory action design and engineering (PADE) process and describes the design, kinematics, and control system of the PPTS and end-users' perception to provide qualitative guidance and feedback about the PPTS. Thirty-six participants (wheelchair users (n = 18) and caregivers (n = 18)) included in the focus groups reported an overall positive impression of the system. Caregivers reported that the PPTS would reduce the risk of injuries and make transfers easier. Feedback revealed limitations and unmet needs of mobility device users, including a lack of power seat functions in the Group-2 wheelchair, a need for no-caregiver assistance/capability for independent transfers, and a need for a more ergonomic touchscreen. These limitations may be mitigated with design modifications in future prototypes. The PPTS is a promising robotic transfer system that may aid in the higher independence of powered wheelchair users and provide a safer solution for transfers.

Comparing the performance of ultralight folding manual wheelchairs using standardized tests.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate ultralight folding manual wheelchairs (UFMWs) in order to produce comparative data on their strength, durability, stability and cost-benefit, and to determine progress of wheelchairs by comparing these results to results of past studies. DESIGN: Engineering testing using American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America (RESNA) standards. SETTING: Laboratory testing of UFMW stability, and static, impact and fatigue strength performance with three devices using ANSI/RESNA standardized tests. PARTICIPANTS: The three wheelchair models were the TiLite Aero X (Permobil, Lebanon, TN), Sunrise Medical Quickie 2 (Fresno, CA) and Ki Mobility Catalyst 5 (Stevens Point, WI). INTERVENTIONS: ANSI/RESNA standardized tests. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mass and critical measurements, static stability, static strength, impact strength, fatigue strength and cost analysis. RESULTS: The ultralight folding wheelchairs continued to outperform their lightweight and rigid framed counterparts. According to these data, the quality of ultralight wheelchairs has not declined over the past 10 years. The Ki Catalyst did not pass strength and durability testing, while the TiLite Aero X and Sunrise Medical Quickie 2 surpassed these tests. CONCLUSIONS: This result exemplifies the need for ongoing research to identify whether wheelchairs satisfy ANSI/RESNA testing requirements and highlights the importance of creating a resource data set. This is particularly important when numerous other wheelchairs fail to meet minimum ANSI/RESNA requirements.Implications for RehabilitationFolding frame wheelchairs offer benefits such as transportability and convenience that may benefit certain wheelchair users, assuming their durability is sufficient and they provide similar benefits vs. other wheelchair construction.Previous studies have shown that folding wheelchairs perform meet the minimum requirements of standardized testing, and it is important to see if durability has increased, decreased or remained the same over the years. Other wheelchair types have remained stagnant with respect to durability and are less likely to meet the minimum durability requirements.Durable devices will improve a wheelchair user's quality of life by reducing downtime while waiting for repairs, and also reduce the likelihood of injury due to component failure.

Comparison of carbon fibre and aluminium materials in the construction of ultralight wheelchairs.

Carbon fibre-reinforced polymers have been used in the sporting goods industry for decades, and wheelchairs have incorporated the material since the late 1980s. There is no independently collected data available on carbon fibre-reinforced polymer wheelchairs' performance on the ANSI/RESNA testing standards, however. This study evaluated three full carbon fibre wheelchair specimens to determine their performance versus similar wheelchairs. Testing determined that while the frames survived more testing cycles than any other wheelchair, the casters and rear tires failed similarly to other devices. Overall, due to the purchase cost, the cost benefit of the tested wheelchair model was similar to aluminium wheelchairs.Implications for rehabilitationCarbon fibre wheelchair construction is a viable alternative to aluminium, titanium, or steel construction, and decreasing costs will continue to improve the benefits of carbon fibre over these modelsCarbon fibre wheelchair found to be more durable than aluminium models, but are also much more expensive. The additional cost may be justified for some users that need the increased durability, howeverIncreased durability will reduce the number of repairs and warranty claims, potentially reducing the burden on a wheelchair user, and also improving their ability to travel and participate in their communityThe low weight of carbon fibre wheelchairs may increase the mobility of some users by allowing them to transfer more easily into and out of vehicles and manoeuvre throughout the environment.

Comparison of High-Strength Aluminum Ultralight Wheelchairs Using ANSI/RESNA Testing Standards.

Background: The use of ultralight manual wheelchairs has been shown to benefit wheelchair users when compared to other types. New aluminum alloy frame materials coming to the market have not been independently evaluated for durability and cost benefit. Methods: Three 70XX aluminum ultralight wheelchair models were tested and compared based on dimensions, stability, and durability using the ANSI/RESNA standards. The results were also compared to previous manual wheelchair studies. Results: This study found that there were no significant cost benefit or durability differences between the wheelchairs tested and previous aluminum or titanium ultralight rigid models. Additionally, 5 of the 9 wheelchairs tested failed to meet the minimum ANSI/RESNA requirements for durability. Conclusion: These results are similar to results from previous rigid ultralight wheelchair studies and indicate that the quality of wheelchairs of this type has not improved and better requirements are necessary for wheelchairs marketed in the United States.