A novel system for the measurement of body shape and construction of seating supports for patients

Patients with severe back deformities can greatly benefit from customized medical seating. Customized medical seating is made by taking measurements of each individual patient and making the seat as per these measurements. The current measuring systems employed by the industry are limited to use in clinics which are generally located only in major population centres. Patients living in remote areas are severely affected by this as the clinics could be far away and inaccessible for these patients. To provide service of customized medical seating requires a new measurement system which is portable so that the system could be transported to the patients in remote areas. The requirements for a new measurement system are analysed to suite the needs of Equipment Technology Services of the Cerebral Palsy League of Queensland. Design for a new measurement system was conceptualised by reviewing systems and technologies in various scientific disciplines. Design for a new system was finalised by optimizing each individual component. The final approach was validated by measuring difficult models and repeating the process to check for process variances. This system has now been adopted for clinical evaluation by ETS Suggestions have been made for further improvements in this new measurement approach.

Announcement and legislation enactment improve children’s seating position in regional areas

New legislation requires all children 7 years and younger to use child-specific Australian Standards approved restraints suitable to their age and restricts seating young children in the front of cars. Observations of child seating position and restraint use were undertaken in Toowoomba and Rockhampton before the Queensland legislation was announced (T1), after the announcement but before it was enacted (T2) and after it came into force (T3). From T1 to T2, the percentage of children seated in the rear increased (69% to 75%), with a further increase from T2 to T3 (75% to 77%). This pattern was clear when there were one or two children in the car, but not when there were 3 or more. The effect on restraint use was more complex. After the announcement (T2) the percentage of children using adult seatbelts significantly increased regardless of the number of child passengers. However, once the legislation was enacted (T3) there was a significant increase in the percentage of children using child seats/boosters where there was one or two child passengers. Where there were three or more children in the vehicle there was little change in restraint choice between pre (T1) and post (T3) legislation.

Announcement and enactment of legislation improve children’s car seating positions

Purpose: Evaluate effectiveness of new legislation Are children more likely to sit in the rear seat now than previously? ----- Are they more likely to wear an age-appropriate restraint? How easy is it for parents to comply (what are the barriers)?----- What more can be done? ----- ----- Design: 2 studies Study 1-observational 3 time phases (pre-legislation; post announcement; post enactment)----- Study 2-intercept interviews 2 time phases (post announcement; post enactment, same parents)----- Three data collection phases: T1 (before announcement, 2007) T2 (after announcement but before enactment, 2009-10) T3 (after the enactment, 2010)----- Two regional cities: Toowoomba, Rockhampton----- Site types Schools, shopping areas

Child car restraints : mandating type and seating row according to age with positive effect in regional city in Queensland, Australia

Road trauma is a leading cause of child injury worldwide. In highly motorised countries, injury as a passenger represents a major proportion of all child road deaths and hospitalisations. Australia is no exception, particularly since there are high levels of private motor vehicle travel to school in most Australian states. Recently the legislation governing the type of car restraints required for children aged under 7 years has changed in Australia, aligning requirements better with accepted best practice. However, it is unclear what effect these changes have had on children’s seating positions or the types of restraints used. A mixed methods evaluation of the impact of the new legislation on compliance was conducted at three times: baseline (Time 1); after announcement that changes were going to be implemented but before enforcement began (Time 2); and after enforcement commenced (Time 3). Measures of compliance were obtained using two methods: road-side observations of vehicles with child passengers; and parental self-report (intercept interviews conducted at Time 2 and Time 3 only). Results from the observations suggested an overall positive effect. Proportions of children occupying front seats decreased overall and use of dedicated child seats increased to almost 40% of the observed children by Time 3. However, almost a quarter of the children observed still occupied front seats. These results differed from those of the interview study where almost no children were reported as usually travelling in the front seat, and reported use of dedicated restraints with children was almost 90%, over twice that of the observations.

Effects of changes to child car restraint legislation in Australia on seating position and restraint use

Road trauma is a leading cause of child injury worldwide and in highly motorised countries, injury as a passenger represents a major proportion of all child road deaths and hospitalisations. Australia is no exception, particularly since motorised transport to school is at high levels in most Australian states. Recently the legislation governing the type of car restraints required for children aged under 7 years has changed in most Australian states aligning requirements better with accepted best practice. However, it is unclear what effect these changes have had on children’s seating positions or the types of restraints used. A mixed methods evaluation of the impact of the new legislation on compliance was conducted at three times: baseline (Time 1); after announcement that changes were going to be implemented but before enforcement began (Time 2); and after enforcement commenced (Time 3). Measures of compliance were obtained using two methods: road-side observations of vehicles with child passengers; and parental self-report (intercept interviews conducted at Time 2 and Time 3 only). Results from the observations suggested an overall positive effect. Proportions of children occupying front seats decreased overall and use of dedicated child seas increased to almost 40% of the observed children by Time 3. However, almost a quarter of the children observed were still occupying the front seat. These results were very different from those of the interview study where almost no children were reported as usually travelling in the front seat, and the reported use of dedicated restraints with children was almost 90%, more than twice that in the observations.

Biomechanical aspects of seating comfort in vehicle seating package engineering

In this paper, problems are described which are related to the ergonomic assessment of vehicle package design in vehicle systems engineering. The traditional approach, using questionnaire techniques for a subjective assessment of comfort related to package design, is compared to a biomechanical approach. An example is given for ingress design. The biomechanical approach is based upon objective postural data. The experimental setup for the study is described and methods used for the biomechanical analysis are explained. Because the biomechanic assessment requires not only a complex experimental setup but also time consuming data processing, a systematic reduction and preparation of biomechanic data for classification with an Artificial Neural Network significantly improves the economy of the biomechanical method.

Understanding the impact of legislative changes on child car seating and restraint practices in regional Queensland

Road crashes contribute to a significant amount of child mortality and morbidity in Australia. In fact, passenger injuries contribute to the majority of child crash road trauma. A number of factors contribute to child injury and death in motor vehicles, including inappropriate seating position, inappropriate choice of restraint, and incorrect installation and use of child restraints. Prior to March 2010, child restraint legislation in Queensland only required children twelve months and younger to be seated in a properly adjusted and fastened child restraint. This legislation left older infants and young children potentially suboptimally protected. From March 2010, new legislation specified seating position and type of child restraint required, depending on the age of the child. This research was underpinned by the Health Belief Model (HBM), which explores health related behaviour, behaviour change, environmental factors influencing behaviour change (including legislative changes) and is flexible enough to be used in relation to parents' health practices for their children, rather than parent health directly. This thesis investigates the extent to which the changes to child restraint legislation have led parents in regional areas of Queensland to use appropriate restraint practices for their children and determines the extent to which the constructs of the HBM, parental perceptions, barriers and environmental factors contribute to the appropriateness of child seating and restraint use. Study One included three sets of observations taken in two regional cities of Queensland prior to the legislative amendment, during an educative period of six months, and after the enactment of the legislation. Each child's seating position and restraint type were recorded. Results showed that the proportion of children observed occupying the front seat decreased by 15.6 per cent with the announcement the legislation. There was no decrease in front seat use at the enactment of the legislation. The proportion of children observed using dedicated child restraints increased by 8.8 per cent with the announcement of the legislation when there was one child in the vehicle. Further, there was a 10.1 per cent increase in the proportion of children observed using a seat belt that fit with the announcement when there was one child in the vehicle and with the enactment of the legislation regardless of the number of children in the vehicle (21.8 per cent for one child, 39.7 per cent for two children and 40.2 per cent for three or more children). Study Two comprised initial intercept interviews, later followed up by telephone, with parents with children aged eight years and younger at the announcement and telephone interviews at the enactment of the legislation in one regional city in Queensland. Parents reported their child restraint practices, and opinions, knowledge and understanding of the requirements of the new legislation. Parent responses were analysed in terms of the constructs in the HBM. When asked which seating position their child 'usually' used, parents reported child front seat use was nil (0.0 per cent) and did not change with the enactment of the legislative amendment. However, when parents were asked whether they allowed children to use the front seat at some point within the six months prior to the interview, reported child front seat use was 7 (5.4 per cent) children at T2 and 10 (9.6 per cent) at T3. Reported use of age-appropriate child restraints did not increase with the enactment of the legislation (p = 0.77, ns). Parents reported restraint practices were classed as either appropriate or inappropriate. Parents who reported appropriate restraint practices were those whose children were sitting in optimal restraints and seating positions for their age according to the requirements of the legislation. Parents who reported inappropriate restraint practices were those who had one or more children who were suboptimally restrained or seated for their age according to the requirements of the legislation. Neither parents' perceptions about their susceptibility of being in a crash nor the likelihood of severity of child injury if involved in a crash yielded significant differences in the appropriateness of reported parent restraint practices over time with the enactment of the legislation. A trend in the data suggested parents perceived a benefit to using appropriate restraint practices was to avoid fines and demerit points. Over 75 per cent of parents who agreed that child restraints provide better protection for children than an adult seat belt reported appropriately seating and restraining their children (2 (1) = 8.093, p<.05). The self-efficacy measure regarding parents' confidence in installing a child restraint showed a significant association with appropriate parental restraint practices (2 (1) = 7.036, p<.05). Results suggested that some parents may have misinterpreted the announcement of the legislative amendment as the announcement of the enforcement of the legislation instead. Some parents who correctly reported details of the legislation did not report appropriate child restraint practices. This finding shows that parents' knowledge of the legislative amendment does not necessarily have an impact on their behaviour to appropriately seat and restrain children. The results of these studies have important implications for road safety and the prevention of road-related injury and death to children in Queensland. Firstly, parents reported feeling unsure of how to install restraints, which suggests that there may be children travelling in restraints that have not been installed correctly, putting them at risk. Interventions to alert and encourage parents to seek advice when unsure about the correct installation of child restraints could be considered. Secondly, some parents in this study although they were using the most appropriate restraint for their children, reported using a type that was not the most appropriate restraint for the child's age according to the legislation. This suggests that intervention may be effective in helping parents make a more accurate choice of the most appropriate type of restraint to use with children, especially as the child ages and child restraint requirements change. Further research could be conducted to ascertain the most effective methods of informing and motivating parents to use the most appropriate restraints and seating positions for their children, as these results show a concerning disparity between reported restraint practices and those that were observed.

What are seating clinicians thinking?

In response to an influx of commercially available seating product, research was undertaken to examine how clinicians, experienced in seating prescriptions make decisions when assisting their clients to choose the most appropriate seating systems for their wheelchairs. This paper will present findings from research undertaken in 2005, into the decision-making processes (known as Clinical Reasoning) used by six clinicians working in Victoria. The paper will discuss the successes and barriers these clinicians encounter when selecting ready-made products, off the shelf, to trial and what parameters arose that required custom-made products. The research findings illuminate the clinicians' considerations for successful client collaboration and the essentials for effective supplier-clinician partnerships when selecting from an overwhelming array of new products and available technologies to accommodate generally a more informed consumer base. The availability of ready-made product has altered consumer perceptions that wheelchair seating is no longer a specialized area and that all clinicians should be competent to prescribe. This paper will reveal how experience seating clinicians assess, make decisions and evaluate the client's needs when undertaking equipment trials and prescribing seating products for complex consumer needs. This is of interest to all who are involved in prescribing and supplying products for wheelchair consumers.