Article

OBJECTIVE: To assess differences between manual wheelchairs and 3
pushrim-activated power-assisted wheelchairs (PAPAWs): Servomatic A and B and
E-motion. DESIGN: Repeated measures. SETTING: Rehabilitation hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Volunteers with spinal cord injuries (N=52). INTERVENTIONS: Ten
subjects propelled the wheelchairs on a dynamometer, 46 evaluated each wheelchair
on indoor and outdoor courses, and 10 evaluated their ability to transfer
themselves and their wheelchairs into and out of their car.
MAIN OUTCOME
MEASURES: Oxygen consumption per unit time (V o2) and heart rate were measured
during propulsion on the dynamometer. Wheelchair efficiency on the indoor and
outdoor courses was evaluated on the basis of heart rate, completion time,
handrim push frequency, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: On the dynamometer,
decreases in V o2 and heart rate were similar with the 3 PAPAWs compared with
manual wheelchairs. On the outdoor course, heart rate was significantly decreased
by PAPAWs compared with manual wheelchairs and patient satisfaction was better
with Servomatic devices than with the E-motion device. Indoors, the course
completion time was longer with the E-motion wheelchair than with other
wheelchairs in the overall population, and handrim push frequency was higher with
the E-motion wheelchair than with other wheelchairs in the subgroup with T12 to
L1 injuries. Car transfer ability was lower with PAPAWs than with manual
wheelchairs. CONCLUSIONS: Differences exist across PAPAWs. Compared with
E-motion, the 2 Servomatic PAPAWs were easier to use outdoors, and difficulty
transferring into/out of the car was similarly increased with all 3 PAPAWs.
CI - Copyright (c) 2015 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by
Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS