Evaluation of rolling resistance in manual wheelchair wheels and casters using drum-based testing.
Joseph Ott, Holly Wilson-Jene, Alicia Koontz and 1 others
PMID 32924657WHAT IT FOUND
Pneumatic wheelchair tires had lower rolling resistance than airless inserts, solid polyurethane, and knobby tires.
Toe misalignment, low tire pressure, carpet, and eight-inch casters raised resistance.
Key findings
01Pneumatic tires had lower rolling resistance than airless-insert, solid polyurethane, and knobby tires, and rolling resistance increased linearly with load.
02Toe angle had a significant overall effect, with no statistical difference between zero and plus or minus one degree; camber and the tested speed range had little effect.
03Eight-inch casters had higher rolling resistance than four- and five-inch casters.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This was bench testing of wheelchair components, not a clinical trial in manual wheelchair users, so it did not measure pain, injury, effort, or activity. Only six rear wheels and six casters were tested, so the findings may not represent all products. The drum rig was newly developed and had no comparable test equipment for validation. Testing was steady-state and did not include wear over time, which can create toe misalignment. Not every level of every factor was tested, and combined-factor testing used a limited range of conditions. Caster tire-pressure results rely on only one pneumatic caster. Perceived weight conversions assume a 250-pound user and device and steady-state propulsion, so they are not patient measurements.
Declared interests
The article lists U.S. government, NIH extramural, and non-U.S. government research support. No author conflict-of-interest statement is included in the supplied text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the ninety-six-pound perceived weight gain as a measured clinical outcome. It is a lab-based conversion for a 250-pound user and device, and the study did not test wheelchair users or injury risk.