Worobey et al. 2012
|Population: Mean age: 42.9 yr; Gender: males=576, females=150; Level of injury: paraplegia=353, tetraplegia=373; Mean time since injury: 12.5 yr.
Intervention: Two groups of participants completed surveys at different time points (2004-2006 and 2006-2001).
|1. Compared to the historical group (2004-2006), the current group (2006-2011) showed a significant increase in the number of repairs (7.8%) and adverse consequences (23.5%) (p<0.001 for both).
2. Compared to manual wheelchair users, power wheelchair users experienced consequences, being stranded, and missing a medical appointment (p<0.001 for all).
3. 64.6% of reported consequences were with power wheelchairs.
4. For wheelchairs with seat functions (tilt, recline, elevating seat/leg rests) there was not a significant number of repairs reported (p=0.156).
5. For wheelchairs with seat functions reported more and higher number of adverse consequences (p=0.011 and 0.008 respectively) including greater number of reports of being stranded (p=0.46), of being injured (p=0.004) and missing medical appointments (p=0.024).
6. No significant differences in number of repairs or adverse consequences based on age, years since injury, gender, occupational status or level of education.
Nelson et al. 2010
|Population: Mean age: 55 yr; Gender: males=632, females=27; Level of Injury: cervical=277, thoracic=337, lumbar=45; Severity of Injury: complete=283, incomplete=376; Mean time since injury: 21 yr.
Outcome Measure: Number of falls and fall related injuries, Comparisons between baseline characteristics and no fall, fall, and injurious fall groups, Comparison of above fall categories with all variables to determine predictors.
|1. Average of w/c use per day=10.9±4.3 hr
2. 31% of the 659 participants reported 553 fall events; 14% of these sustained an injury; 1 reported death related to fall.
3. Of the 204 participants who reported a fall, 109 (53%) reported more than 1 fall (range 2-53).
4. Of the 208 reported injuries, 179 (85%) were minor, 29 (14%) were serious
5. Predictors of wheelchair related falls included: increased pain in previous 2 mo (p<0.001); positive for alcohol abuse (p=0.01); high FIM score for motor function (p<0.001); history of fall in past year (p<0.001); fewer years with SCI (p=0.007); a shorter length of w/c (p=0.005).
6. Predictors of falls with injuries were; increased pain in previous 2 mo (p<0.001); high FIM score for motor function (p=0.1); history of fall in previous year (p<0.001) and lack of accessibility of home entrance (p=0.01).
|Population: Mean age: 42.4 yr; Gender: males=1758 , females=455; Level of injury: tetraplegia=1121, paraplegia=1061, Mean time since injury: 12.2 yr.
Intervention: As part of a larger database data collection survey about assistive technology, the questions specific to wheelchair breakdown and adverse events for people with SCI who use a wheelchair for more than 40 hr/wk were analyzed.
Outcome Measures: Frequency of a repair occurrence in the past 6 mo, Frequency of breakdown in the past 6 mo, Consequences of breakdown – participants could choose all that applied:1) No consequences, 2) Being stranded, 3) Being injured, 4) Missed work or school, 5) Missed a medical appointment.
|1. 971 (44.8%) participants reported at least 1 wheelchair repair within a 6 mo period.
2. Out of 2101 participants that had remembered the number of repairs, 427 (20.3%) had 1 repair, 348 (16.6%) had 2-3 repairs, and 130 (6.2%) completed ≥4 repairs.
3. Participants that reported ≥1 repair (n=192, 19.7%) reported 262 adverse events; stranded (n=140), being injured (n=42), missing work/school (n=33), or missing a medical appointment (n=47).
4. 8.7% of 2213 participants reported ≥1 adverse event.
5. Participants with power wheelchairs had significantly more repairs than participants with manual wheelchairs (power=1.39±3.675, manual=0.81±1.820, p<0.001).
6. Participants with power wheelchairs reported significantly more adverse events compared to participants with manual wheelchairs (106/192, p<0.001) and also experienced more adverse consequences (p<0.001).
7. There were no significant differences in reported repairs between participants with power wheelchairs with seat functions compared to participants without seat functions (seat=1.32±2.234, no seat=1.20±1.668, p=0.488); the occurrence of adverse consequences was not associated with power seat functions (p=0.208).