Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Lui J, MacGillivray MK, Sheel AW, Jeyasurya J, Sadeghi M, Sawatzky BJ. Mechanical efficiency of two commercial lever-propulsion mechanisms for manual wheelchair locomotion. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(10):1363– 72. Slideshow Project DOI: /JRRD JSP Method Subjects – 10 nondisabled males. Procedure – Performed submaximal exercise tests with both lever- propulsion mechanisms and hand rim propulsion on 2 different wheelchairs. Measures – Cardiopulmonary parameters (O 2 uptake [VO 2 ], heart rate [HR], energy expenditure [En]). – Total external power (P ext ) using drag test protocol. – ME (ratio of P ext to En).
Citation preview
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Lui J, MacGillivray MK, Sheel AW, Jeyasurya J, Sadeghi M, Sawatzky BJ. Mechanical efficiency of two commercial lever-propulsion mechanisms for manual wheelchair locomotion. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(10):1363–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034JSP
Mechanical efficiency of two commercial lever-propulsion
mechanisms for manual wheelchair locomotion
Jordon Lui, BKin; Megan K. MacGillivray, MSc; A. William Sheel, PhD; Jeswin Jeyasurya, MASc; Mahsa Sadeghi, MD; Bonita Jean Sawatzky, PhD
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Lui J, MacGillivray MK, Sheel AW, Jeyasurya J, Sadeghi M, Sawatzky BJ. Mechanical efficiency of two commercial lever-propulsion mechanisms for manual wheelchair locomotion. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(10):1363–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034JSP
• Aim– Evaluate mechanical efficiency (ME) of 2 lever-
propulsion mechanisms (torsion spring and roller clutch) for wheelchairs.
– Compare ME of lever vs hand rim propulsion within same wheelchair.
• Relevance– Conventional wheelchairs have hand rims for manual
propulsion, which can be energetically inefficient.
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Lui J, MacGillivray MK, Sheel AW, Jeyasurya J, Sadeghi M, Sawatzky BJ. Mechanical efficiency of two commercial lever-propulsion mechanisms for manual wheelchair locomotion. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(10):1363–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034JSP
Method• Subjects– 10 nondisabled males.
• Procedure– Performed submaximal exercise tests with both lever-
propulsion mechanisms and hand rim propulsion on 2 different wheelchairs.
• Measures– Cardiopulmonary parameters (O2 uptake [VO2], heart rate
[HR], energy expenditure [En]).– Total external power (Pext) using drag test protocol.– ME (ratio of Pext to En).
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Lui J, MacGillivray MK, Sheel AW, Jeyasurya J, Sadeghi M, Sawatzky BJ. Mechanical efficiency of two commercial lever-propulsion mechanisms for manual wheelchair locomotion. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(10):1363–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034JSP
Results
• No significant effect by lever-propulsion mechanism for all physiological measures.– Suggests torsion spring didn’t have physiological
benefit vs roller clutch mechanism.
• Both lever-propulsion mechanisms showed decreased VO2 and HR and increased ME (as function of slope) vs hand rim propulsion.
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Lui J, MacGillivray MK, Sheel AW, Jeyasurya J, Sadeghi M, Sawatzky BJ. Mechanical efficiency of two commercial lever-propulsion mechanisms for manual wheelchair locomotion. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(10):1363–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2013.02.0034JSP
Conclusion
• Both lever-propulsion mechanisms tested are more mechanically efficient than conventional hand rim propulsion, especially when slopes are encountered.
