Li Chun-Ting, Huang Kuo-Yuan, Kung Chien-Feng, Chen Yen-Nien, Tseng Yen-Ting, Tsai Kuen-Horng
Applied Biomechanics Laboratory, Graduate Institute of Mechatronic System Engineering, National University of Tainan, No. 33, Sec. 2, Shu-Lin St., West Central Dist., Tainan, 70005, Taiwan.
Department of Orthopedics, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, No.138, Sheng-Li Rd., North Dist., Tainan, 70403, Taiwan.
Biomed Eng Online. 2017 Aug 29;16(1):108. doi: 10.1186/s12938-017-0398-8.
Reclining wheelchair users often add one or more sitting assistive devices to their wheelchairs, but the effect of these additional sitting assistive devices on the risk of pressure ulcers has rarely been investigated. This study examined the four modes of reclining wheelchair without and with different sitting assistive devices, namely the back reclined mode, the lumbar support with back reclined mode, the femur upward with back reclined mode, and the lumbar support with femur upward with back reclined mode, in terms of their effects on human-wheelchair interface pressure.
This study recruited 16 healthy participants to undergo the aforementioned four modes in random order and have their human-wheelchair interface pressure measured. The initial setting of experimental reclining wheelchair backrest was pushed backward to reach a 150° recline. The data on interface pressure were collected for 5 s while the participant maintained a stable sitting position. The contact area, average pressure, and peak pressure on the back area, ischial area, and femur area were recorded and calculated.
Among all tested modes, the lumbar support with femur upward with back reclined mode provided the most significant reduction in stress load on the ischial area (P ≤ 0.010) and shifted part of the load to the femur area (P ≤ 0.009).
This study quantified the effects of and differences between various reclining wheelchair-sitting assistive device combination modes. These findings are useful for the decision-making processes of rehabilitation physicians, wheelchair users, and manufacturers.
斜躺式轮椅使用者通常会在轮椅上添加一个或多个坐姿辅助装置，但这些额外的坐姿辅助装置对压疮风险的影响鲜有研究。本研究考察了不带和带有不同坐姿辅助装置的四种斜躺式轮椅模式，即靠背倾斜模式、带腰部支撑的靠背倾斜模式、大腿上抬的靠背倾斜模式以及带腰部支撑和大腿上抬的靠背倾斜模式，对人 - 轮椅界面压力的影响。
本研究招募了16名健康参与者，让他们按随机顺序接受上述四种模式，并测量其人 - 轮椅界面压力。实验用斜躺式轮椅靠背的初始设置向后推至150°倾斜。在参与者保持稳定坐姿的同时，收集5秒的界面压力数据。记录并计算背部区域、坐骨区域和大腿区域的接触面积、平均压力和峰值压力。
在所有测试模式中，带腰部支撑和大腿上抬的靠背倾斜模式使坐骨区域的应力负荷显著降低（P≤0.010），并将部分负荷转移至大腿区域（P≤0.009）。
本研究量化了各种斜躺式轮椅 - 坐姿辅助装置组合模式的影响及差异。这些发现对康复医生、轮椅使用者和制造商的决策过程很有用。
