Citation

Guillon B, Van-Hecke G, Iddir J, Pellegrini N, Beghoul N, Vaugier I, Figère M, Pradon D, Lofaso F. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2015; 96(5): 894-904.

Affiliation

Assistance publique - Hôpitaux de Paris(APHP), Centre d'Investigation Clinique - Innovations Technologiques, Hôpital Raymond Poincaré, and University of Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines, EA 4497, Garches, and Garches Fundation, France. Electronic address: f.lofaso@rpc.ap-hop-paris.fr.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.apmr.2015.01.009

PMID

25620717

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess differences between manual wheelchairs and three pushrim-activated power-assist wheelchairs (PAPAWs) (Servomatic(a) A and B and E-motion(b)) DESIGN: Repeated measures SETTING: Rehabilitation hospital PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-two volunteers with spinal cord injuries INTERVENTION: 10 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 uptake (VO2) and heart rate (HR) were measured during propulsion on the dynamometer. Wheelchair efficiency on the indoor and outdoor courses was evaluated based on HR, completion time, handrim push frequency, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS: On the dynamometer, decreases in VO2 and HR were similar with the three PAPAWs compared to the manual wheelchairs. On the outdoor course, HR was significantly decreased by PAPAWs compared to the manual wheelchairs, and patient satisfaction was better with the Servomatic(a) devices than with E-motion(b). Indoors, the course completion time was longer with E-motion than with the other wheelchairs in the overall population, and handrim push frequency was higher with E-motion(b) than with the other wheelchairs in the subgroup with T12-L1 injuries. Car transfer ability was lower with the PAPAWs than with the manual wheelchairs.

CONCLUSIONS: Differences exist across PAPAWs. Compared to E-motion(b), the two Servomatic(a) PAPAWs were easier to use outdoors, and difficulty transferring into/out of the car was similarly increased with all three PAPAWs.

Language: en