Frost Karen L, Bertocci Gina, Smalley Craig
Department of Bioengineering, J.B. Speed School of Engineering, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY.
Department of Bioengineering, J.B. Speed School of Engineering, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 May;96(5):928-33. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.12.013. Epub 2015 Jan 7.
To estimate the prevalence of wheeled mobility device (WhMD) ramp-related incidents while boarding/alighting a public transit bus and to determine whether the frequency of incidents is less when the ramp slope meets the proposed Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) maximum allowable limit of ≤9.5°.
Observational study.
Community public transportation.
WhMD users (N=414) accessing a public transit bus equipped with an instrumented ramp.
Not applicable.
Prevalence of boarding/alighting incidents involving WhMD users and associated ramp slopes; factors affecting incidents.
A total of 4.6% (n=35) of WhMD users experienced an incident while boarding/alighting a transit bus. Significantly more incidents occurred during boarding (6.3%, n=26) than during alighting (2.2%, n=9) (P<.01), and when the ramp was deployed to street level (mean slope=11.4°) compared with sidewalk level (mean slope=4.2°) (P=.01). The odds ratio for experiencing an incident when the ramp slope exceeded the proposed ADA maximum allowable ramp slope was 5.4 (95% confidence interval, 2.4-12.2; P<.01). The odds ratio for assistance being rendered to board/alight when the ramp slope exceeded the proposed ADA maximum allowable ramp slope was 5.1 (95% confidence interval, 2.9-9.0; P<.01).
The findings of this study support the proposed ADA maximum allowable ramp slope of 9.5°. Ramp slopes >9.5° and ramps deployed to street level are associated with a higher frequency of incidents and provision of assistance. Transit agencies should increase awareness among bus operators of the effect kneeling and deployment location (street/sidewalk) have on the ramp slope. In addition, ramp components and the built environment may contribute to incidents. When prescribing WhMDs, skills training must include ascending/descending ramps at slopes encountered during boarding/alighting to ensure safe and independent access to public transit buses.
评估乘坐/下车公共交通巴士时轮式移动设备（WhMD）坡道相关事件的发生率，并确定当坡道坡度符合拟议的《美国残疾人法案》（ADA）最大允许限值≤9.5°时事件发生频率是否更低。
观察性研究。
社区公共交通。
使用配备仪器化坡道的公共交通巴士的WhMD使用者（N = 414）。
不适用。
涉及WhMD使用者的乘坐/下车事件的发生率及相关坡道坡度；影响事件的因素。
共有4.6%（n = 35）的WhMD使用者在乘坐/下车公共交通巴士时经历了事件。上车时发生的事件（6.3%，n = 26）明显多于下车时（2.2%，n = 9）（P <.01），并且与部署到人行道水平（平均坡度 = 4.2°）相比，当坡道部署到街道水平（平均坡度 = 11.4°）时事件更多（P =.01）。当坡道坡度超过拟议的ADA最大允许坡道坡度时发生事件的比值比为5.4（95%置信区间，2.4 - 12.2；P <.01）。当坡道坡度超过拟议的ADA最大允许坡道坡度时在上下车时获得协助的比值比为5.1（95%置信区间，2.9 - 9.0；P <.01）。
本研究结果支持拟议的ADA最大允许坡道坡度为9.5°。超过9.5°的坡道坡度以及部署到街道水平的坡道与更高的事件发生率和协助提供相关。运输机构应提高巴士运营人员对跪式操作和部署位置（街道/人行道）对坡道坡度影响的认识。此外，坡道部件和建筑环境可能导致事件发生。在开具WhMD处方时，技能培训必须包括在乘坐/下车时遇到的坡度上上下坡道，以确保安全且独立地乘坐公共交通巴士。
Zotero 插件