One Size Does Not Fit All-Mobility Device Type Affects Speed, Collisions, Fatigue, and Pain

被引:4
作者
Hoenig, Helen [1 ,2 ]
Morgan, Michelle [3 ]
Montgomery, Christy [3 ]
Landerman, Lawrence R. [3 ]
Caves, Kevin [4 ]
机构
[1] Durham Vet Adm Med Ctr, Phys Med & Rehabil Serv, Durham, NC 27705 USA
[2] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med, Div Geriatr, Durham, NC USA
[3] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Ctr Aging, Durham, NC USA
[4] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Speech & Audiol, Durham, NC USA
来源
ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION | 2015年 / 96卷 / 03期
关键词
Mobility limitation; Outcome and process assessment; Rehabilitation; Self-help devices; Walkers; Wheelchairs; OLDER-ADULTS; ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY; RHEUMATOID-ARTHRITIS; COMMUNITY; WALKERS; WHEELCHAIRS; PERFORMANCE; VETERANS; OUTCOMES; DEMANDS;
D O I
10.1016/j.apmr.2014.07.420
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Objective: To determine whether differences could be detected in mobility outcomes during community mobility and home mobility tasks according to type of mobility assistive device. Design: Randomized, repeated measures. Setting: Community mobility task: traversing 341.4m between the rehabilitation clinic and hospital entrance; home mobility task: traversing 39m into and out of a patient training bathroom and bedroom. Participants: Community-dwelling, cognitively intact ambulatory veterans (N=59) who used a mobility device within the 14 days prior to the study. Interventions: Participants tested 3 types of mobility assistive devices with wheels: 4-wheeled walker (WW), manual wheelchair (MWC), and powered wheelchair (PWC). The first and last devices used by each participant were randomly assigned as either MWC or WW. The PWC was always the second device. Main Outcomes Measures: Speed (m/s), collisions (total), fatigue (0-10 Likert scale), and pain (0-10 Likert scale, diagram). Results: The community mobility task was performed with all 3 devices by 52 (88%) veterans, and the home mobility task was performed with all 3 devices by 53 (90%) participants. In each task, 28 participants used the WW and 28 participants used the MWC as the final device. In the community mobility task, statistically significant differences (P<.05) were seen with >= 1 device comparison for all studied outcomes (eg, standardized mean difference for the MWC compared with the PWC showed-.67 fewer collisions for the MWC). In the home mobility task, speed, collisions, and fatigue showed statistically significant (P<.05) device-related differences (eg, standardized mean difference for the WW compared with the MWC showed-.88 fewer collisions for the WW). Conclusions: We found statistically significant and substantively different effects from 3 commonly used mobility assistive devices with wheels on diverse mobility outcomes when used in typical community mobility and home mobility tasks, providing proof of concept support for a research methodology applicable to comparative outcome studies of diverse mobility aids. (C) 2015 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine
引用
收藏
页码:489 / 497
页数:9
相关论文
共 37 条
  • [1] Akhigbe T, 2013, J SPINAL CORD MED
  • [2] Update on Distance and Velocity Requirements for Community Ambulation
    Andrews, A. Williams
    Chinworth, Susan A.
    Bourassa, Michael
    Garvin, Miranda
    Benton, Dacia
    Tanner, Scott
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2010, 33 (03) : 128 - 134
  • [3] Powered mobility for middle-aged and older adults -: Systematic review of outcomes and appraisal of published evidence
    Auger, Claudine
    Demers, Louise
    Gelinas, Isabelle
    Jutai, Jeffrey
    Fuhrer, Marcus J.
    DeRuyter, Frank
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE & REHABILITATION, 2008, 87 (08) : 666 - 680
  • [4] Assistive devices for balance and mobility: Benefits, demands, and adverse consequences
    Bateni, H
    Maki, BE
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2005, 86 (01): : 134 - 145
  • [5] Manual wheelchair pushrim biomechanics and axle position
    Boninger, ML
    Baldwin, M
    Cooper, RA
    Koontz, A
    Chan, L
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2000, 81 (05): : 608 - 613
  • [6] Wheelchair-Related Accidents: Relationship With Wheelchair-Using Behavior in Active Community Wheelchair Users
    Chen, Wan-Yin
    Jang, Yuh
    Wang, Jung-Der
    Huang, Wen-Ni
    Chang, Chan-Chia
    Mao, Hui-Fen
    Wang, Yen-Ho
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2011, 92 (06): : 892 - 898
  • [7] Clinical Utility of the 2-Minute Walk Test for Older Adults Living in Long-Term Care
    Connelly, D. M.
    Thomas, B. K.
    Cliffe, S. J.
    Perry, W. M.
    Smith, R. E.
    [J]. PHYSIOTHERAPY CANADA, 2009, 61 (02) : 78 - 87
  • [8] Trends and issues in wheelchair technologies
    Cooper, Rory A.
    Cooper, Rosemarie
    Boninger, Michael L.
    [J]. ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY, 2008, 20 (02) : 61 - 72
  • [9] Tracking mobility-related assistive technology in an outcomes study
    Demers, Louise
    Fuhrer, Marcus J.
    Jutai, Jeffrey W.
    Scherer, Marcia J.
    Pervieux, Isabelle
    DeRuyter, Frank
    [J]. ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY, 2008, 20 (02) : 73 - 83
  • [10] FUNCTIONAL REACH - A NEW CLINICAL MEASURE OF BALANCE
    DUNCAN, PW
    WEINER, DK
    CHANDLER, J
    STUDENSKI, S
    [J]. JOURNALS OF GERONTOLOGY, 1990, 45 (06): : M192 - M197