Comparison of trunk mechanics and spatiotemporal outcomes in caregivers using a robotic assisted transfer device and a mobile floor lift.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare trunk mechanics, distance covered, and average instantaneous velocity and acceleration recorded with caregivers performing transfer tasks using a research mannequin with both a prototype robotic assisted transfer device (RATD) and a mobile floor lift. DESIGN: Cross-Sectional. SETTING: Biomechanics Lab and Human Engineering Research Laboratories. PARTICIPANTS: Caregivers (N = 21). INTERVENTION: Robotic Assisted Transfer Device. OUTCOME MEASURES: Range of flexion-extension, lateral bend, and axial rotation; distance covered; average instantaneous velocity and acceleration. RESULTS: Caregivers performing transfers using the RATD as compared to when using the moble floor lift reported significantly smaller range of trunk flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation, and reported lower pelvic based distance covered and slower average instantaneous velocity and acceleration (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The design and usability of a RATD indicates design driven mobility advantages over clinical standard mobile floor lifts due to its ability to expand the workspace while further reducing risk factors for low back pain. While the concept is promising, further testing is required to address limitations and confirm the concept for clinical applications.

Assessment of Muscle Activation of Caregivers Performing Dependent Transfers With a Novel Robotic-Assisted Transfer Device Compared With the Hoyer Advance.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare muscle activity in caregivers while using a novel robotic-assisted transfer device (Strong Arm) to a clinical standard of care (Hoyer Advance). DESIGN: A quasi-experimental design was used in which 20 caregivers (33 ± 15 yrs old) performed transfers with three surfaces (toilet, bench, and shower chair) with the Strong Arm and Hoyer Advance. Transfer completion time (seconds), peak percentage surface electromyography (EMG), and integrated EMG of the bilateral erector spinae, latissimus dorsi, pectoralis major and anterior deltoid were measured. RESULTS: Caregivers required less transfer time when transferring from wheelchair to surface using the Hoyer Advance (P = 0.011, f = 0.39). For the lower back, significantly lower peak percentage EMGs were found using Strong Arm in 50% and for the integrated EMG in 25% of the cases, with the remaining cases showing no significant differences. For the shoulder, significantly lower peak percentage EMG values were found using Strong Arm in 19% of transfers and lower integrated EMG was found in 25% of transfers when using the Hoyer Advance, with the remaining cases showing no significant differences. CONCLUSION: Although back muscle activation during Strong Arm transfers is statistically, but not clinically, lower, additional features that couple with significantly lower muscle activation make it an alternative to the clinical standard for further research and possible clinical applicability.