Guimaraes & Mann (2003). Evaluation of pressure and durability of a low-cost wheelchair cushion designed for developing countries.

Wise Young · 06-21-2003, 07:22 AM

• Guimaraes E and Mann WC (2003). Evaluation of pressure and durability of a low-cost wheelchair cushion designed for developing countries. Int J Rehabil Res 26:141-3. Summary: Pressure sores are a medical problem for wheelchair users worldwide. In developing countries this problem is more critical because of lack of access to specialized technologies and medical assessment. Seat cushions to relieve pressure represent one of best ways to prevent pressure sores for people with spinal cord injury, amputation, cerebral palsy, and other disabilities that require use of wheelchairs for long periods of time. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a low cost cushion, called the Tuball, designed for low-income communities in developing countries. The Tuball is made from bicycle inner tubes and plastic balls. Its durability and pressure-relieving characteristics were compared with the ROHOTM cushion and the foam cushions now used in Brazil. A sample of 30 participants tested the three cushions: 15 persons with paraplegia and 15 matched able-bodied persons evaluated the capacity of the cushions to distribute pressure. This study also addressed the use of samples of persons without disabilities to test wheelchair cushions.The Tuball cushion provided significantly better pressure distribution than the foam cushion. A t-test was used to compare disabled persons and non-disabled persons as samples in testing cushions. No difference between pressure distribution between non-disabled and disabled participants was found in testing the ROHO cushion or the foam cushion. However, both capacities of pressure distribution and HICPR varied between non-disabled and disabled participants for the Tuball cushion.To determine the useful life of the Tuball cushion, a fatigue test was conducted to simulate sitting and transfer. Both the Tuball and ROHO cushions withstood the equivalent of at least 1 year of use, whereas the foam cushion broke down.

Leo · 06-21-2003, 09:51 AM

Any more info on this? I've searched for a while on google. Like we in the states couldn't use a cheaper but as good cushion. eh

06-21-2003, 07:22 AM	#1
Wise Young Administrator Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: New Brunswick, NJ, USA Posts: 37,975	Guimaraes & Mann (2003). Evaluation of pressure and durability of a low-cost wheelchair cushion designed for developing countries. • Guimaraes E and Mann WC (2003). Evaluation of pressure and durability of a low-cost wheelchair cushion designed for developing countries. Int J Rehabil Res 26:141-3. Summary: Pressure sores are a medical problem for wheelchair users worldwide. In developing countries this problem is more critical because of lack of access to specialized technologies and medical assessment. Seat cushions to relieve pressure represent one of best ways to prevent pressure sores for people with spinal cord injury, amputation, cerebral palsy, and other disabilities that require use of wheelchairs for long periods of time. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a low cost cushion, called the Tuball, designed for low-income communities in developing countries. The Tuball is made from bicycle inner tubes and plastic balls. Its durability and pressure-relieving characteristics were compared with the ROHOTM cushion and the foam cushions now used in Brazil. A sample of 30 participants tested the three cushions: 15 persons with paraplegia and 15 matched able-bodied persons evaluated the capacity of the cushions to distribute pressure. This study also addressed the use of samples of persons without disabilities to test wheelchair cushions.The Tuball cushion provided significantly better pressure distribution than the foam cushion. A t-test was used to compare disabled persons and non-disabled persons as samples in testing cushions. No difference between pressure distribution between non-disabled and disabled participants was found in testing the ROHO cushion or the foam cushion. However, both capacities of pressure distribution and HICPR varied between non-disabled and disabled participants for the Tuball cushion.To determine the useful life of the Tuball cushion, a fatigue test was conducted to simulate sitting and transfer. Both the Tuball and ROHO cushions withstood the equivalent of at least 1 year of use, whereas the foam cushion broke down.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06-21-2003, 09:51 AM	#2
Leo Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Yankton, South Dakota Posts: 3,950	Any more info on this? I've searched for a while on google. Like we in the states couldn't use a cheaper but as good cushion. eh