A field deceleration test to assess total wheelchair resistance

Scoping review of the rolling resistance testing methods and factors that impact manual wheelchairs

Introduction

Rolling resistance (RR) is a drag force acting on manual wheelchairs that is associated with increased propulsion force and is linked to secondary disabling conditions of the upper limbs. A scoping review was conducted to understand how RR of manual wheelchairs has been measured and to identify limitations of those test methods and the factors tested.

Methods

A total of 42 papers were identified and reviewed, and test methods were categorized based on the measurement style of RR, testing level, and if multiple parameters could be tested. Additionally, 34 articles were reviewed for what factors were tested.

Results

Seven different testing methods categories were identified: drag test, treadmill, motor draw, deceleration, physiological expenditure, ergometer/dynamometer, and robotic test rig. Relevant articles were categorized into testing factor categories: camber, toe, tire type, tire pressure, caster type, mass, mass distribution, and type of surface.

Conclusions

The variety of testing methods suggests the need for a standardized method that can be used for wheelchair wheel design and selection to reduce RR. It is important to use adjustments, such as a forward rear axle position to mitigate RR as well as using high-pressure pneumatic tires that are properly inflated.

Evaluation of rolling resistance in manual wheelchair wheels and casters using drum-based testing

PURPOSE

Rolling resistance is a drag force that increases the required propulsion force of manual wheelchair users (MWU) and increases the risk of upper extremity pain and injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To understand the influence of different design, environmental, and setup factors on rolling resistance (RR), a series of tests were performed on a range of wheels and casters using a drum-based equipment with the capability to measure RR forces. Independent factors were varied including load, camber, toe, speed, tire pressure, and surface, using ranges anticipated in the community. Combined factor testing of these factors was also completed to evaluate of RR changes due interactions of multiple factors.

RESULTS

A default reference trial was used to verify repeatability throughout the 924 rear wheel trials and 255 caster trials. Toe angle and tire pressure were found to have large and exponential relationships to RR. Tire/caster type and surfaces are significant influencers but have no specific relationship to RR. Load had a direct linear relationship to RR whereas camber and speed had a relatively small impact on RR. Pneumatic tires had lower rolling resistance compared to airless inserts, solid mag wheels and knobby tires. Combined factor testing revealed a linear additive effect of individual factors. Statistical analysis revealed that tire/caster type is a covariate to all of the results and statistical differences (p < 0.01) were found for toe, tire/caster type, tire pressure, surfaces and load.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors act in a cumulative manner to impact RR and need to be monitored in device design, development, issuance, and maintenance.Implications for RehabilitationFirst comprehensive study of MWC RR showing the effects of individual and combined factors.Highlights the direct importance of tire and caster selection.

Determinants of shuttle run performance in the prediction of peak VO2 in wheelchair users

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of ergonomic and environmental variations on indoor shuttle run (SR) performance in wheelchair sportsmen.

METHODS

Eleven experienced male wheelchair sportsmen performed three 25-m SRs in random order with varying turning capacity (TC) and mechanical resistance (MR): condition NN where participants used their sports wheelchair on a tartan surface, condition RN with increased MR, and condition RD with limited TC. Metabolic data were continuously recorded using a portable K4b(2) system.

RESULTS

Friedman ANOVA with Wilcoxon a posteriori testing indicated similar VO(2peak) values in all three tests. SR performance, however, was significantly different across the three test conditions (NN: 536.18 +/-119.09 s; RN: 488.82+/-119.84 s; RD: 404.91+/-88.41 s). SR performance contributed for 28% of the explained variance of the measured VO(2peak). The addition of TC or MR or both increased the explained variance to 32, 38 and 41%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate a significant impact of variations in floor surface and wheelchair-user interface on SR performance. The findings also suggest that strong reservations have to be made regarding the validity of a SR test, as predictor of VO(2peak) in a wheelchair user population.

Prediction of VO(2peak) in wheelchair-dependent athletes from the adapted Léger and Boucher test

PURPOSE

:The purpose of this study was to provide a predictive peak oxygen uptake ([V]O(2) peak) equation in wheelchair-dependent athletes using the Adapted Léger and Boucher test. SUBJECTS AND PROTOCOL: :Fifty-six wheelchair-dependent athletes, 47 males and nine females (30.3+/-4 years), underwent a clinical examination to assess their anthropometric characteristics: height, mass, body mass index (BMI), lean body mass, arm length, and muscular arm volume. They performed a deceleration field test to assess the subject-wheelchair resistance defined as a mechanical variable, and they then performed the Adapted Léger and Boucher test to assess physiological data at maximal exercise ([V]O(2) peak, heart rate max) concomitantly with biomechanical (number of pushes) and performance variables (maximal aerobic velocity Va(max) and maximal distance). The [V]O(2) peak was measured directly using a portable telemetric oxygen analyzer. Subjects were then randomly assigned to an experimental group (n=49) to determine the predictive equation, and a validation group (n=7) to check the external validity of the equation.

RESULTS

A stepwise multiple regression with [V]O(2) peak (l min(-1)) as the dependent variable led to the following equation: [V]O(2) peak=0.22 Va(max) - 0.63 log(age)+0.05 BMI 0.25 level+0.52, with r(2)=0.81 and SEE=0.01. Paraplegic subjects with high and low lesion level spinal injuries were attributed the coefficient of 1 and 0, respectively. The external validity of the equation was positive since the predicted [V]O(2) peak values did not significantly differ from directly measured [V]O(2) peak (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

We concluded that [V]O(2) peak in wheelchair-dependent athletes was predictable using the equation of the present study and the described incremental test.