elevation manual wheelchair

elevation manual wheelchair

LINK 1 ENTER SITE >>> Download PDF
LINK 2 ENTER SITE >>> Download PDF

File Name:elevation manual wheelchair.pdf
Size: 3898 KB
Type: PDF, ePub, eBook

Category: Book
Uploaded: 18 May 2019, 22:20 PM
Rating: 4.6/5 from 740 votes.

Status: AVAILABLE

Last checked: 18 Minutes ago!

In order to read or download elevation manual wheelchair ebook, you need to create a FREE account.

Download Now!

eBook includes PDF, ePub and Kindle version

✔ Register a free 1 month Trial Account.

✔ Download as many books as you like (Personal use)

✔ Cancel the membership at any time if not satisfied.

✔ Join Over 80000 Happy Readers

elevation manual wheelchairTo view this site, you must enable JavaScript or upgrade to a JavaScript-capable browser.Actual product appearance may vary. Please read product description for full and accurate details. PDG Elevation wheelchair requires a completed order form and client measurement form for us to process your order or. Returns This is a special order item and cannot be returned.We do not guarantee fulfillment of any desired purpose or product suitability to the user and this. Features Sizing Videos Order Forms Warranty Returns Back Manual Wheelchair Buyer's Guide. PDG Elevation wheelchair requires a completed order form and client measurement form for us to process your order or an estimate: Wheelchair measurement guide PDG Elevation order form The required forms are also available via email upon request. Please call us for help with wheelchair order form and upgrade options selection, Our expert team members are available for your help. Call now for exclusive offers PDG Elevation ultra-lightweight manual wheelchair uses a unique hydraulic system to elevate users for better interaction or reaching ability, or decrease height for a better wheeling position. The wheelchair is constructed of 7005 heat-treated aluminum and weighs in at just 24 lbs. Elevation is lightweight wheelchair, made out of aluminum and it is easy to take in and out of an automobile. Elevation manual wheelchair comes with dynamic seating with which users can adjust their sitting position easily. Please call us for specific details Back This is a special order item and cannot be returned. We do not guarantee fulfillment of any desired purpose or product suitability to the user and this will not be considered as a valid reason for return. Returns will be accepted only if a wrong product is delivered other than what originally ordered. It is customer's responsibility to check the product upon delivery and note any such discrepancy at the earliest and report the dealer.http://nkino.ru/upload/delete-rediffmail-account-manually.xml

Tags:
• elevation manual wheelchair, pdg elevation ultralight manual wheelchair, elevation manual wheelchair, elevation manual wheelchair, elevation manual wheelchair lift, elevation manual wheelchair lifts, elevation manual wheelchair accessible, elevation manual wheelchair mobility, elevation manual wheelchair, elevating manual wheelchair.

Hygiene products will not be returned once used or opened. Custom orders are non-refundable and non-returnable. Please call us for specific details. Back to Top Services Business Account Create a Free Business Account Sign up now. Call us or Fill in this Online Form Purchase Orders We accept purchase orders. Download order form Quote Request Get Online Quote with Special pricing Create a free quote now. Every person has the right to have his or her disability compensated as far as possible by aids with the same technical standard as those we all use in our everyday lives. Currently, he resides in Brooklyn, NY with his family. Patrick is one of the best wheelchair basketball players in the world and a three-time Paralympic gold medalist. He began playing ice sledge hockey in 1997. One of the few Paralympic athletes to win a Paralympic gold medal in both the Summer and Winter Games, Brad has been a huge influencer for Team Canada in para hockey since 1999. He began playing wheelchair basketball at the age of 15. In 2010, Richard was inducted into the BC Sports Hall of Fame, and in 2012 received a National Aboriginal Achievement Award for his outstanding athletic accomplishments. Users can easily adjust sitting posture to suit activity. Starring Dr. Jaimie Borisoff, the inventor of the Elevation. Selecting from 10 inches of real-time adjustable seat height and dump, the benefits include a reduction of ischial pressure, circulation and increased muscle tone. Steve Mitchell of the Cleveland Veterans Administration Medical Center and Jaimie Borisoff introduced the DWM framework to the mobility industry, most recently at the 2015 International Seating Symposium. These include new pushrim designs, power-assist wheels, and wheel attachments that reduce rolling resistance. These include passive “front-ends” that improve rolling resistance, powered front-ends, power-assist wheels, and rear-drive systems.http://www.buildonhope.org/delete-sality-virus-manually.xml A MWC can easily return to base form when the add-on is not needed anymore, remaining a light, portable device useful in most situations in the home, community and when travelling. Its seat height and backrest recline angle adjustment capabilities allow the user to self-adjust their sitting posture to best suit their current activity.A new “kneeling” feature was incorporated into a new frame design. This allows users to bring the front of the chair closer to the floor to do things many wheelchair users can’t typically do (e.g. play with children or get back into the chair from a fall). This wheelchair prototype is currently being evaluated with end users to examine its functionality and performance. International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 4. Canada Research Chair in Rehabilitation Engineering Design, British Columbia Institute of Technology, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada 5. Biomedical Engineering Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Find articles by Jaimie Borisoff William C. Miller 2. International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 6. GF Strong Rehabilitation Research Lab, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Find articles by William C. Miller Borna Noureddin 1. Biomedical Engineering Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 6. GF Strong Rehabilitation Research Lab, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, UNITED STATES Competing Interests: I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: J Borisoff is an employee of PDG Mobility, the manufacturer of the Elevation Wheelchair.https://congviendisan.vn/vi/boss-dsd-3-manual In addition, J Borisoff is listed on the following patents related to the Elevation wheelchair, and has a financial interests in the sale of the Elevation wheelchair product: US 7,950,684 (licensed to PDG Mobility); US 7,845,665 (licensed to PDG Mobility); US 8,042,824 (licensed to PDG Mobility); US 8,801,020 (licensed to PDG Mobility). This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. Conceptualization: JM JB WM BN. Data curation: JM JB WM. Formal analysis: JM JB WM BN. Funding acquisition: JB. Investigation: JM JB WM. Methodology: JM JB WM BN. Project administration: JB. Resources: JB. Software: JB BN. Supervision: JM JB WM BN. Validation: JB BN. Visualization: JM JB BN. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Associated Data Data Availability Statement Our ethics certification approved for this study limits data sharing due to the study protocol including data logging of daily activities. The IRB that imposes these ethical restrictions is the University of British Columbia Research Ethics Board. Prior research has been performed on wheelchair tilt, recline, and seat elevation use in the community, however no such research has been done on this new class of manual ultralight wheelchair with “on the fly” adjustments. Eight participants had data loggers installed onto their own wheelchair for seven days to measure rear seat height, backrest angle position, occupied sitting time, and distance traveled. Analysis of rear seat height and backrest adjustment data revealed considerable variability in the frequency of use and positions used by participants. There was a wide spread of mean daily rear seat heights among participants, from 34.1 cm to 46.7 cm. Two sub-groups of users were further identified: those who sat habitually at a single typical rear seat height, and those who varied their rear seat height more continuously.https://diatecgroup.com/images/89-mazda-mx6-manual.pdf Findings also showed that participants used the rear seat height adjustment feature significantly more often than the backrest adjustment feature. This obvious contrast in feature use may indicate that new users of this class of wheelchair may benefit from specific training. While the small sample size and exploratory nature of this study limit the generalizability of our results, our findings offer a first look at how active wheelchairs users are using a new class of ultralight wheelchair with “on the fly” seating adjustments in their communities. Further studies are recommended to better understand the impact of dynamic seating and positioning on activity, participation and quality of life. Introduction The wheelchair is a widely used assistive technology for people with spinal cord injury (SCI) or other mobility impairments. Ultralight rigid wheelchairs, or ultralight folding wheelchairs with similar performance specifications, have become a standard provision for people with disabilities who need manual wheelchairs and are active members of the community. Some research points to the beneficial impact that ultralight wheelchairs may have on participation. Another wheelchair technology that may beneficially impact people with mobility impairments is dynamic seating. The concept of dynamic seating currently refers to either two classes of wheelchair seating. First, it refers to a caregiver’s or user’s ability to easily and quickly (i.e. with client sitting normally in the chair) adjust the seating position during typical wheelchair usage. Manual wheelchairs with this class of dynamic seating include wheelchairs that tilt-in-space or provide backrest recline. Second, dynamic seating may refer to wheelchair seating that moves elastically in response to a user’s movements (e.g. backrests that recline momentarily and absorb energy due to involuntary extensor thrusts). Due to confusion about the use of the term “dynamic seating” we are also using the descriptive term of “on the fly adjustments” to emphasize the difference between these wheelchairs and this new class of ultralight wheelchair described below, that was intended for a different client population. Another dynamic seating feature, most commonly found in power wheelchairs, is seat elevation (i.e. increasing seat height). Unfortunately, until recently, no dynamic seating or “on the fly” adjustment features were available on the market for active, ultralight wheelchair users. Some ultralight wheelchairs have completely “fixed” frames manufactured to the custom specifications of the user. However, most ultralights offer adjustments to meet an individual users’ general needs (e.g. setting a fixed seat height and back rest position according to the user’s body weight, size, and functional capabilities). These adjustments typically require tools, time, and training. But most significantly, these adjustments cannot be made “on the fly” to allow users to adjust their seated position to match different activities in real-time. A descriptive analysis of seat and backrest adjustments is presented, including frequency of use and duration spent at specific positions throughout daily use. Comparisons between distinct patterns of use by specific subject groupings are also described. In addition, based on anecdotal use reports, it was hypothesized that participants would more frequently use rear seat height adjustments compared to backrest adjustments. Methods Study design and participants Cross sectional methods were used for this study. A convenience sample consisting of purposively selected participants were recruited from the lower mainland of Vancouver, British Columbia (BC). A total of eight participants were recruited for the study. Ethical approval for this study was obtained through the University of British Columbia Behavioural Research Ethics Board and the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority before the study commenced. Data logger instrumentation Data related to dynamic seating usage, seat occupancy, and odometry were collected using a customized data-logging device, developed at the British Columbia Institute of Technology (BCIT). The data logger consisted of two SparkFun Logomatic v2 dataloggers (SparkFun Electronics, Niwot, CO) coupled to an external battery pack. Two potentiometers were attached to the wheelchair seat back, one each for seat elevation and backrest recline. A chair sensor pad (SMART Caregiver Corporation, Petaluma CA) was installed underneath the seat cushion to measure seat occupancy. A custom optical encoder disc was attached to the wheel to measure wheelchair odometry. All sensors were attached to the data logging device which was secured temporarily to the wheelchair frame under the seat using a plastic snap-on clamp system. See Fig 1 for details. The data logger sampled the potentiometers and occupancy sensor at a rate of 4 Hz, with the raw signal smoothed with a running average of 5 samples. Odometry data was a 250 Hz digital square wave output directly to the data logger, with each square wave corresponding to one division of the optical encoder disk, which consisted of 60 divisions per revolution of the wheel. The data logging system was developed under BCIT’s ISO 9001 Quality System and included validation of the sensors and entire data recording system. The system was capable of collecting up to two weeks of data on a secured digital memory card. After the data collection period, data was downloaded with a memory card reader. Open in a separate window Fig 1 Wheelchair data logger instrumentation showing potentiometers used to determine rear seat height and backrest recline (left) and encoder disc used to measure odometry (right). Study protocol Individuals who responded to the initial letter of contact were emailed an informed consent form, and two separate meetings were scheduled with each participant. The meetings were held at the participant's’ home, or at a mutually convenient location in the community. At the start of the first meeting, written informed consent was obtained from the participant. Participants were fully informed about the purpose of the study and the data that was being collected. They were instructed to continue with their normal activities and routines throughout the data collection period, despite chair instrumentation. They were given verbal instructions to change the external battery pack once a day and to charge the second battery pack when not in use. A time log sheet was provided for each participant to record the time they attached a charged battery to the data logger. A brief calibration routine was also performed, whereby the subject placed the wheelchair seat into 3 different rear seat heights and 3 different backrest positions. The attending researcher would measure the rear seat height and backrest angle in these positions, and record the results. This data would later be used to calibrate the raw data logger signal to clinically-relevant results of rear seat height and backrest angle. The first meeting lasted one hour. The second meeting was held nine days after the first meeting to ensure that a full week of data was collected, and lasted two hours. During the second meeting, the data-logging device, battery, and sensors were removed from the wheelchair. Demographics and survey instruments A demographic questionnaire was used to gather participant information and describe the study sample. The FEW is a self-report questionnaire that probes users’ perceptions of wheelchair functionality related to 10 basic wheelchair uses (e.g. reaching and carrying out tasks at different surface heights, transferring, and carrying out personal care tasks). Data analysis Only seven of the nine days of data collection were analyzed because the first and last days involved interactions between participants and researchers, which disrupted participants’ normal routines. Raw data stored on the secure digital memory card was downloaded onto a personal computer and analyzed using MATLAB (Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA). Using the algorithms described below, the raw data was transformed into daily seated occupancy, seating positions and adjustment frequencies (seat elevation, and backrest angle), and distance traveled. Seat occupancy was defined as any time spent in the wheelchair in which data was recorded as occupied pressure for greater than 60 seconds. The total hours each participant spent in their wheelchair each day was calculated. Rear seat height adjustments were defined as any rear seat elevation change greater or equal to 1.5 cm that lasted for at least five seconds. The number of times each participant accessed their seat elevation feature was calculated for each of the seven days. A dwell time of 20 seconds was chosen in order to eliminate confounding temporary readings, e.g. during wheeling, or when a subject briefly leaned rearwards during weight shifts or otherwise. The number of times each participant adjusted their backrest angle was calculated for each of the seven days. Distance traveled was expressed in meters for each of the seven days. Descriptive statistics, including means, standard deviations, and frequencies were calculated, as well as medians and ranges. Nonparametric statistics were used to test hypothesized median differences due to relatively small sample size and skewed distributions in the data. A one-tailed Wilcoxon test for paired data was used to compare the frequency of seat vs.Results Sample characteristics Sample characteristics of participants, BI, and FEW scores are summarized in Table 1. A total of eight participants completed the study, including seven males and one female. Two participants reported that that they were able to ambulate with the use of a walking aid. The majority (7 out of 8) of the participants had a BI of 70 or over, and were living independently in the community. A single participant had a BI score of 40 and required partial care-giver support with self-care activities. It was clear from observations and feedback that each participant was fully capable of understanding how to physically make dynamic “on the fly” adjustments to their wheelchair. All participants had similar ranges of adjustment capability of both rear seat height and backrest angle, with the exception of Subject 3 as described above. However with regards to rear seat height, participants may have had different minimum rear seat heights from which their range would follow upwards from; this was a factory or dealer adjustment set prior to use, and based on client and therapist input. Due to technical problems in the field, some data were not collected: for Participants 4 and 5 only six days of data were recorded and for Participants 2 and 7 no odometry data was recorded due to incorrect installation of the equipment. Similarly, Participant 5 (a participant with CP) would often ambulate within his home using various supports. Both feature activations per hour of use had positive skew values, attesting to these behaviours trending to lower typical hourly usage frequencies. The hypothesis of whether participants would more frequently use rear seat height adjustments compared to backrest adjustments was tested, using median values as appropriate for this small sample size and skewed data. Open in a separate window Fig 2 Pattern (by the minute) of daily seat height and backrest angle position over two days for a single participant. The backrest adjustment feature was, with the exception of a single participant, far less used than the seat height adjustment feature. Two participants in fact only adjusted their backrest once during the entire data collection period; although, half the participants did change their back angle more than once per day on average. Characteristics of “on the fly” rear seat height adjustments The observation of the relatively minimal usage of the backrest angle adjustment feature led to an analytical focus on the patterns of rear seat height adjustment, of which there seemed to be interesting differences among participants upon inspection. First, there was a considerable difference in the typical rear seat heights at which individual participants spent their time (see Table 3 ). This is graphically depicted in Fig 3. A distinct pattern of typical daily use by different participants was observed. One sub-group of 4 participants habitually spent more than 80 of their time in a single bin of rear seat heights ( Table 4 ). The other sub-group had a more varying rear seat height use, spending no more than 58 in a single rear seat height bin. Of the 4 participants in the habitual sub-group, there were three different rear seat heights for their most usual positions: Participant 7 usually sat at the lowest height bin; Participants 2 and 8 usually sat at the second lowest bin; and Participant 4 sat at the middle of the five bins. We also hypothesized that the varying sub-group had changed their rear seat height more frequently than the habitual sub-group. Several days of rear seat height activity for both a habitual and varying user is shown in Fig 4 for comparison purposes. Table 4 Habitual and varying seat height use. This new form of assistive technology is unique to wheelchair consumers because it allows users to self-adjust “on the fly” their rear seat height and backrest angle on an ultralight manual wheelchair throughout normal daily activities. Our study findings indicate that the typical rear seat height used by participants varied considerably from user to user. The dynamic rear seat height usage of the participants with the highest and lowest mean rear seat heights (i.e. Participants 5 and 7 with mean rear seat heights of 46.7 cm and 34.1 cm respectively) provide an interesting illustrative example. These two participants had very different disabilities and wheelchair configurations. Participant 5, who sat the highest on average, was an ambulatory man with cerebral palsy who had the function to stabilize and effectively use the chair at these higher heights. In contrast, Participant 7 was a man with a T10 level SCI. His wheelchair was configured with the lowest possible rear seat height of 32.9 cm from the floor. These results may indicate that users, when given the option of adjusting rear seat height, may naturally adapt usage to best suit their disability and functional abilities. Given that most manual wheelchairs are configured to a fixed seat position, our findings may provide additional support for the use of dynamic seating to optimize functional ability. In addition to the variability noted with rear seat height positions, daily adjustment patterns were also found to be variable. Our study revealed two distinct types of rear seat height adjustment patterns amongst our participants: those who spent most of their seated time at a “habitual” rear seat height, and those whose rear seat height patterns were more varied. They identified two distinct groups of users: those who spent at least 80 of their seated time in a single position, and those who had no meaningful typical position (i.e spent Within these sub-groups, it is interesting to note that there was considerable variation in the most usual rear seat height for users in the habitual group—i.e. of the 4 users in this category, there were 3 different habitual rear seat heights. The findings also indicate that the varying sub-group changed their rear seat height more frequently than the habitual sub-group. These results open up a number of questions for future studies. For example, are rear seat height adjustment patterns related to the variability of the tasks participants do in a day (i.e. do users in the habitual sub-group conduct fewer different tasks throughout the day). Could independent wheelchair settings such as rear axle position or cushion type affect seat height adjustment behaviours? (Neither of these variables were recorded in this study.) Are there specific reasons why a limited number of rear seat heights work best for these habitual users (e.g. stability, positioning, usability). And what impact would training have on adjustment frequency. The findings confirmed our hypothesis that backrest adjustment would be used much less than the rear seat height adjustment. In fact, only one participant adjusted the backrest more than once per hour. We were able to define two sub-groups of backrest users: frequent and infrequent adjusters. Frequent adjusters were found to have adjusted the backrest feature ten times more than the infrequent adjusters, indicating that one sub-group may have “bought into” the concept of backrest adjustment, whereas the other sub-group may not have. These configurations can impact both the wheelchair user’s comfort and stability and could potentially have influenced how often the backrest feature is accessed. With regards to rear axle position, this pre-set wheelchair configuration parameter is independent of “on the fly” seating adjustments, allowing user-preferred “tippiness” to be optimized. Users with particularly tippy wheelchairs may have used their backrest adjustment less often due to stability concerns. While these effects were not considered in this study, further investigation is warranted. It is worth noting that even amongst the frequent backrest adjusters, the usage of this feature was still low compared to rear seat height adjustments. When going uphill, the backrest can be adjusted forward to provide support to users leaning into the slope. Although each participant in our study had full knowledge of how to adjust their backrest and rear seat height position, we did not gather any data about whether they were informed of specific applications where these adjustments would be beneficial. Thus it was unclear to the extent to which they understood the functional implications of making adjustments or the appropriate situations to use them. No information is provided about the nuances of usage or appropriate applications of usage. Given the potential benefits of these adjustability features, this may point to the need for training initiatives to help users better understand when to use them. It is evident from these studies that both MWC and PWC users spend considerable time sitting in their wheelchairs. The implications of prolonged periods of sitting may be even more serious for people with disabilities who may not be able to readily change their position. These findings have the potential to impact both clinical practice and wheelchair design. Prescribers of the technology may use this information to better match users with wheelchairs that best suit their unique situations (e.g. based on their disability, functional abilities, and participation goals). Clinicians may use this information to better develop and implement training programs to teach users about feature usage. Finally, a better understanding of dynamic feature usage may provide insight for future wheelchair designs. Study limitations Due to the sample size, the objective wheelchair data was not normally distributed, and the results cannot be generalized beyond the current sample. The sample lacked variability in functional independence with ADLs, and primary diagnoses that accounted for participants’ wheelchair use (i.e. the majority had mid-level SCI), which reduced the heterogeneity of the sample. Other limitations should also be noted. Firstly, knowledge of the expertise levels of participants (i.e. their nuanced understanding of the functional implications of making adjustments or appropriate usage situations) was not evaluated. It is possible that all these factors may have influenced seating adjustment patterns. Further, the data collection period was limited which may not have reliably captured typical usage patterns. Also, some data were missing due to technical difficulties in the field. Future research This study provides preliminary evidence regarding the characteristic usage of dynamic seating features on ultralight manual wheelchairs, collected with the use of data loggers. However, it remains unanswered as to exactly how individuals use their dynamic seating features to assist with mobility related activities, ADLs, and participation. Qualitative research to study context (e.g. how, why, when dynamic seating features are used) is recommended, which will also provide greater insight into the benefits and limitations of this technology. The inclusion of more disability groups is also suggested to generalize the findings to a wider population. For instance, one study could compare ultralight manual wheelchair users with and without dynamic seating; another intervention study could investigate users pre- and post-delivery of an ultralight manual wheelchair with dynamic “on the fly” seating features. Conclusions This exploratory study provided insight into the usage of an ultralight manual wheelchair with “on the fly” seating adjustment features. Analysis of rear seat height and backrest adjustment data revealed considerable variability in the positions used by participants. Two sub-groups of users were identified: those who sat habitually at a single typical rear seat height, and those who varied their rear seat height more continuously.