Consequences of a cross slope on wheelchair handrim biomechanics.

OBJECTIVE To test the hypothesis that pushing on a cross slope leads to increased handrim loading compared with that found on a level surface. DESIGN Case series. SETTING Biomechanics laboratory. PARTICIPANTS Twenty-six manual wheelchair users. INTERVENTION Subjects pushed their own wheelchairs on a research treadmill set to level, 3 degrees , and 6 degrees cross slopes. Propulsion speed was self-selected for each cross-slope condition. Handrim biomechanics were measured for the downhill wheel, using an instrumented wheelchair wheel and a motion capture system. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Speed, peak kinetics (force, rate of loading, torque), push angle, cadence, push distance, and power output were averaged over a 20-push set for each subject and each cross-slope condition. Outcomes were compared across cross slopes using a repeated-measures analysis of variance. RESULTS Push angle and cadence were unaffected by cross slope. A trend of decreasing self-selected speeds with increasing cross slope was not significant. There were considerable increases in the peak kinetic measures, with the axial moment increasing by a factor of 1.8 on the 6 degrees cross slope (P=.000). More pushes were required to cover the same distance when on a cross slope (P<.034). The power required for propulsion increased by a factor of 2.3 on the 6 degrees cross slope (P=.000). CONCLUSIONS Users must push harder when on a cross slope. This increased loading is borne by the users' arms, which are at risk for overuse injuries. Exposure to biomechanic loading can be reduced by avoiding cross slopes when possible.

[1]  Alicia M Koontz,et al.  Relation between median and ulnar nerve function and wrist kinematics during wheelchair propulsion. , 2004, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[2]  Brubaker Ce,et al.  Effects of side slope on wheelchair performance. , 1986 .

[3]  Kenton R Kaufman,et al.  The effect of seat position on wheelchair propulsion biomechanics. , 2004, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[4]  R. Waters,et al.  Late complications of the weight-bearing upper extremity in the paraplegic patient. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[5]  J B Kirschbaum,et al.  DESIGNING SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS FOR ACCESS, PART 2, BEST PRACTICES DESIGN GUIDE , 2001 .

[6]  Alicia M Koontz,et al.  Shoulder magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities, wheelchair propulsion, and gender. , 2003, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[7]  Santosh Lal,et al.  Premature degenerative shoulder changes in spinal cord injury patients , 1998, Spinal Cord.

[8]  R. Waters,et al.  Upper extremity pain in the postrehabilitation spinal cord injured patient. , 1992, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[9]  W. Waring,et al.  Compressive mononeuropathies of the upper extremity in chronic paraplegia , 1991, Paraplegia.

[10]  S. D. Shimada,et al.  Wheelchair pushrim kinetics: body weight and median nerve function. , 1999, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[11]  Peter Wing,et al.  Consortium for spinal cord medicine. , 2007, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[12]  Margaret A. Finley,et al.  The biomechanics of wheelchair propulsion in individuals with and without upper-limb impairment. , 2004, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[13]  Alicia M Koontz,et al.  Filter frequency selection for manual wheelchair biomechanics. , 2002, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[14]  D. Cardenas,et al.  Upper extremity pain after spinal cord injury , 1999, Spinal Cord.