Forces, moments, and acceleration acting on a restrained dummy during simulation of three possible accidents involving a wheelchair negotiating a curb

Comparison between lap belt and four-point belt

Avital Fast, Julian Sosner, Paul Begeman, Mark A. Thomas, Dorina Drukman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of two types of restraining belts (lap belt and a four-point belt) on an instrumented dummy during three situations: wheelchair hitting straight into curb (SIC); wheelchair falling straight off a curb (SOC); wheelchair falling diagonally off a curb (DOC). A fully instrumented (50th percentile Hybrid III) dummy was seated in a standard wheelchair and restrained with one of the belts. The wheelchair rolled down a ramp reaching a platform at 2.4 miles per hour (comfortable walking speed). Three types of experiments were performed: SIC, SOC, DOC. Each experiment was repeated at least three times. Forces, moments, and acceleration were monitored and recorded via 48 sensors placed at the head, spine, and limbs. All experiments were videotaped and photographed. The data were averaged and compared with standards that have been previously established in car crash testing and with data recently obtained in a similar study using a nonrestrained dummy. Our results showed that in the SIC experiments, low magnitude forces, moments, and acceleration of no clinical significance were recorded with both types of belts. The wheelchair remained upright and the dummy safely seated. In the SOC experiments, the two belts prevented the dummy's ejection from the chair and, thus, have been effective in lowering the forces, moments, and acceleration and preventing significant injuries to the head and neck regions. In the DOC experiments, the lap belt proved to be somewhat more effective than the four-point belt in lowering the extension forces at the upper neck and the moments at the lower neck below injury levels. It also kept the head injury criteria well below injury level. We postulate that the four-point belt was less effective because of its more extensive body fixation, which leads to concentration of moments and forces at the head and lower neck regions. The results of this study show that restraining systems can enhance the safety of wheelchair occupants in certain incidents. It has been demonstrated that the lap belt is as effective as the four-point belt system in SIC and SOC incidents. In DOC falls, neither belt could prevent falls and trauma to the head and neck region. The lap belt, however, was somewhat superior. We recommend that wheelchairs be equipped with a lap belt and patients be encouraged to buckle-up while using the wheelchair outdoors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)370-377
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume76
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1997

Fingerprint

Wheelchairs
Negotiating
Accidents
Accidental Falls
Craniocerebral Trauma
Neck Injuries
Neck
Head
Architectural Accessibility
Spine
Extremities
Safety
Wounds and Injuries

Keywords

  • Accidents
  • Falls
  • Seat Belts
  • Wheelchair

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rehabilitation
  • Health Professions(all)
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

@article{b1684fbf79644eaab59b8e0c981cb239,
title = "Forces, moments, and acceleration acting on a restrained dummy during simulation of three possible accidents involving a wheelchair negotiating a curb: Comparison between lap belt and four-point belt",
abstract = "The objective of this study was to determine the effect of two types of restraining belts (lap belt and a four-point belt) on an instrumented dummy during three situations: wheelchair hitting straight into curb (SIC); wheelchair falling straight off a curb (SOC); wheelchair falling diagonally off a curb (DOC). A fully instrumented (50th percentile Hybrid III) dummy was seated in a standard wheelchair and restrained with one of the belts. The wheelchair rolled down a ramp reaching a platform at 2.4 miles per hour (comfortable walking speed). Three types of experiments were performed: SIC, SOC, DOC. Each experiment was repeated at least three times. Forces, moments, and acceleration were monitored and recorded via 48 sensors placed at the head, spine, and limbs. All experiments were videotaped and photographed. The data were averaged and compared with standards that have been previously established in car crash testing and with data recently obtained in a similar study using a nonrestrained dummy. Our results showed that in the SIC experiments, low magnitude forces, moments, and acceleration of no clinical significance were recorded with both types of belts. The wheelchair remained upright and the dummy safely seated. In the SOC experiments, the two belts prevented the dummy's ejection from the chair and, thus, have been effective in lowering the forces, moments, and acceleration and preventing significant injuries to the head and neck regions. In the DOC experiments, the lap belt proved to be somewhat more effective than the four-point belt in lowering the extension forces at the upper neck and the moments at the lower neck below injury levels. It also kept the head injury criteria well below injury level. We postulate that the four-point belt was less effective because of its more extensive body fixation, which leads to concentration of moments and forces at the head and lower neck regions. The results of this study show that restraining systems can enhance the safety of wheelchair occupants in certain incidents. It has been demonstrated that the lap belt is as effective as the four-point belt system in SIC and SOC incidents. In DOC falls, neither belt could prevent falls and trauma to the head and neck region. The lap belt, however, was somewhat superior. We recommend that wheelchairs be equipped with a lap belt and patients be encouraged to buckle-up while using the wheelchair outdoors.",
keywords = "Accidents, Falls, Seat Belts, Wheelchair",
author = "Avital Fast and Julian Sosner and Paul Begeman and Thomas, {Mark A.} and Dorina Drukman",
year = "1997",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1097/00002060-199709000-00004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "76",
pages = "370--377",
journal = "American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation",
issn = "0894-9115",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Forces, moments, and acceleration acting on a restrained dummy during simulation of three possible accidents involving a wheelchair negotiating a curb

T2 - Comparison between lap belt and four-point belt

AU - Fast, Avital

AU - Sosner, Julian

AU - Begeman, Paul

AU - Thomas, Mark A.

AU - Drukman, Dorina

PY - 1997/9

Y1 - 1997/9

N2 - The objective of this study was to determine the effect of two types of restraining belts (lap belt and a four-point belt) on an instrumented dummy during three situations: wheelchair hitting straight into curb (SIC); wheelchair falling straight off a curb (SOC); wheelchair falling diagonally off a curb (DOC). A fully instrumented (50th percentile Hybrid III) dummy was seated in a standard wheelchair and restrained with one of the belts. The wheelchair rolled down a ramp reaching a platform at 2.4 miles per hour (comfortable walking speed). Three types of experiments were performed: SIC, SOC, DOC. Each experiment was repeated at least three times. Forces, moments, and acceleration were monitored and recorded via 48 sensors placed at the head, spine, and limbs. All experiments were videotaped and photographed. The data were averaged and compared with standards that have been previously established in car crash testing and with data recently obtained in a similar study using a nonrestrained dummy. Our results showed that in the SIC experiments, low magnitude forces, moments, and acceleration of no clinical significance were recorded with both types of belts. The wheelchair remained upright and the dummy safely seated. In the SOC experiments, the two belts prevented the dummy's ejection from the chair and, thus, have been effective in lowering the forces, moments, and acceleration and preventing significant injuries to the head and neck regions. In the DOC experiments, the lap belt proved to be somewhat more effective than the four-point belt in lowering the extension forces at the upper neck and the moments at the lower neck below injury levels. It also kept the head injury criteria well below injury level. We postulate that the four-point belt was less effective because of its more extensive body fixation, which leads to concentration of moments and forces at the head and lower neck regions. The results of this study show that restraining systems can enhance the safety of wheelchair occupants in certain incidents. It has been demonstrated that the lap belt is as effective as the four-point belt system in SIC and SOC incidents. In DOC falls, neither belt could prevent falls and trauma to the head and neck region. The lap belt, however, was somewhat superior. We recommend that wheelchairs be equipped with a lap belt and patients be encouraged to buckle-up while using the wheelchair outdoors.

AB - The objective of this study was to determine the effect of two types of restraining belts (lap belt and a four-point belt) on an instrumented dummy during three situations: wheelchair hitting straight into curb (SIC); wheelchair falling straight off a curb (SOC); wheelchair falling diagonally off a curb (DOC). A fully instrumented (50th percentile Hybrid III) dummy was seated in a standard wheelchair and restrained with one of the belts. The wheelchair rolled down a ramp reaching a platform at 2.4 miles per hour (comfortable walking speed). Three types of experiments were performed: SIC, SOC, DOC. Each experiment was repeated at least three times. Forces, moments, and acceleration were monitored and recorded via 48 sensors placed at the head, spine, and limbs. All experiments were videotaped and photographed. The data were averaged and compared with standards that have been previously established in car crash testing and with data recently obtained in a similar study using a nonrestrained dummy. Our results showed that in the SIC experiments, low magnitude forces, moments, and acceleration of no clinical significance were recorded with both types of belts. The wheelchair remained upright and the dummy safely seated. In the SOC experiments, the two belts prevented the dummy's ejection from the chair and, thus, have been effective in lowering the forces, moments, and acceleration and preventing significant injuries to the head and neck regions. In the DOC experiments, the lap belt proved to be somewhat more effective than the four-point belt in lowering the extension forces at the upper neck and the moments at the lower neck below injury levels. It also kept the head injury criteria well below injury level. We postulate that the four-point belt was less effective because of its more extensive body fixation, which leads to concentration of moments and forces at the head and lower neck regions. The results of this study show that restraining systems can enhance the safety of wheelchair occupants in certain incidents. It has been demonstrated that the lap belt is as effective as the four-point belt system in SIC and SOC incidents. In DOC falls, neither belt could prevent falls and trauma to the head and neck region. The lap belt, however, was somewhat superior. We recommend that wheelchairs be equipped with a lap belt and patients be encouraged to buckle-up while using the wheelchair outdoors.

KW - Accidents

KW - Falls

KW - Seat Belts

KW - Wheelchair

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031239139&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031239139&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00002060-199709000-00004

DO - 10.1097/00002060-199709000-00004

M3 - Article

VL - 76

SP - 370

EP - 377

JO - American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

JF - American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

SN - 0894-9115

IS - 5

ER -