![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
Purpose: Report on the development of an ergonomic manual wheelchair pushrim and evaluate the user’s perception of the quality of the device. Method: Based on anthropometric features and ergonomic concepts, a new wheelchair pushrim was designed, and a prototype was manufactured in polyurethane, using the rapid prototyping technique and serial production of parts by molding. The prototype was tested by a sample of wheelchair users, who rated the perceived quality of the device after testing both the new and conventional pushrims in a wheelchair propulsion experimental protocol. Results: The new ergonomic pushrim was found to be, in general, better than the conventional round tube pushrim. Specifically, experienced wheelchair users found the new wheelchair pushrim better in terms of easy and comfortable propulsion, braking and maneuvering of the wheelchair, and appearance. Conclusions: The new wheelchair pushrim provides a proper fit for the hands due to its ergonomic design and its polyurethane composition, making wheelchair propulsion easier and more comfortable than the conventional wheelchair pushrim. Assistive technology devices should be design based on ergonomic concepts that involve less effort and offer greater comfort for the user.
Implications for Rehabilitation
Manual wheelchair propulsion has been related with upper limb injuries that may potentially limit functionality.
The conventional pushrim does not meet the need for a firm and stable grip, requiring further effort to hold the pushrim during manual propulsion that may cause discomfort, pain and contribute for developing upper limb injuries.
In a relatively small sample of wheelchair users, this study shows that an ergonomically designed pushrim makes manual propulsion easier and more comfortable compared to the conventional pushrim.
Acknowledgement
Acknowledgements to CAPES (Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Level Personnel) for the financial support.
Declaration of Interest: The authors report no conflict of interest.
Appendix 1. Comparative questionnaire of two types of wheelchair pushrim
With respect to driving comfort of the wheelchair, you consider the new pushrim (as compared to conventional pushrim):
a) Much better
b) A little better
c) Same
d) Somewhat worse
e) Much worse
With regard to the comfort to brake the wheelchair, you consider the new pushrim (as compared to conventional pushrim):
a) Much better
b) A little better
c) Same
d) Somewhat worse
e) Much worse
In your opinion, the coupling of your hands to the new pushrim is, compared to the conventional pushrim:
a) Much better
b) A little better
c) Same
d) Somewhat worse
e) Much worse
To maneuver the wheelchair and transpose some obstacles (like small steps, for example), you consider the new pushrim, compared to conventional pushrim:
a) Much better
b) A little better
c) Same
d) Somewhat worse
e) Much worse
With regard to the force needed to propel the wheelchair, how do you evaluate the new pushrim, compared to the conventional pushrim?
a) Much less force
b) A little less force
c) Same
d) A little harder
e) Much harder
To hold the new pushrim, compared to the conventional pushrim, how much force did you need to do?
a) Much less force
b) A little less force
c) Same
d) A little harder
e) Much harder
What is your perception regarding the appearance of the new wheelchair pushrim, comparing with the conventional pushrim?
a) Much better
b) A little better
c) Same
d) Somewhat worse
e) Much worse
You consider that the wheelchair locomotion with the new pushrim, compared to the conventional pushrim, became:
a) Much easier
b) A little easier
c) Same
d) A little harder
e) Much more difficult
What is your overall evaluation of the new pushrim, in comparison with the conventional pushrim?
a) Much better
b) A little better
c) Same
d) Somewhat worse
e) Much worse