Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2008
Comparing performance of manual wheelchair skills using new and conventional rear anti-tip devices: randomized controlled trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kirby R Lee, Corkum Casey G, Smith Cher, Rushton Paula, MacLeod Donald A, Webber Adam
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To test the hypotheses that, compared with participants using manual wheelchairs equipped with conventional rear anti-tip devices (C-RADs), those using a new RAD design that deploys through an arc (Arc-RAD) perform RAD-relevant wheelchair skills better and as safely.
DESIGN: A randomized controlled study.
SETTING: A rehabilitation center.
PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=30) including 16 able-bodied and 14 wheelchair users.
INTERVENTION: Participants were provided with wheelchair skills training (up to 2.4h).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Total percentage score on a set of 23 RAD-relevant skills of the Wheelchair Skills Test (WST, version 3.2) administered a minimum of 3 days after training.
RESULTS: For the C-RAD and Arc-RAD groups, the mean +/- standard deviation RAD-relevant WST scores were 32.3%+/-8.5% and 85.1%+/-18.9% (Kruskal-Wallis, P<.001). Of the 23 RAD-relevant individual skills, the success rates for the Arc-RAD group were at least 20% higher (the criterion we set for clinical significance) in 17 (74%). For the C-RAD group, the success rate was 0% for the 12 wheelie-dependent skills, the 13-cm-high obstacle, and the 15-cm level change ascent. There were no serious adverse effects in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: The new RAD design allows much better performance on relevant wheelchair skills than the conventional design without compromising safety.
DESIGN: A randomized controlled study.
SETTING: A rehabilitation center.
PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=30) including 16 able-bodied and 14 wheelchair users.
INTERVENTION: Participants were provided with wheelchair skills training (up to 2.4h).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Total percentage score on a set of 23 RAD-relevant skills of the Wheelchair Skills Test (WST, version 3.2) administered a minimum of 3 days after training.
RESULTS: For the C-RAD and Arc-RAD groups, the mean +/- standard deviation RAD-relevant WST scores were 32.3%+/-8.5% and 85.1%+/-18.9% (Kruskal-Wallis, P<.001). Of the 23 RAD-relevant individual skills, the success rates for the Arc-RAD group were at least 20% higher (the criterion we set for clinical significance) in 17 (74%). For the C-RAD group, the success rate was 0% for the 12 wheelie-dependent skills, the 13-cm-high obstacle, and the 15-cm level change ascent. There were no serious adverse effects in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: The new RAD design allows much better performance on relevant wheelchair skills than the conventional design without compromising safety.