Manual wheelchair pushrim dynamics in people with multiple sclerosis1 Brian T. Fay, PhD, Michael L. Boninger, MD, Shirley G. Fitzgerald, PhD, Aaron L. Souza, MS, CPT, Rory A. Cooper, PhD, Alicia M. Koontz, PhD, ATP  Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation  Volume 85, Issue 6, Pages 935-942 (June 2004) DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.08.093

Fig 1 Laboratory setup. The SMARTWheel device and independent rollers permit recording of bilateral propulsion kinematics and kinetics. The device was used on both sides. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 935-942DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.08.093)

Fig 2 Propulsion patterns as described by Boninger et al.12 The gray line represents the path of a marker on the hand as a subject propels a wheelchair. The dark circle represents the pushrim of the wheelchair. The semicircular pattern was found to be most advantageous. Legend: —, SC; __, ARC; + +, SLOP; ■ ■, DLOP. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 935-942DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.08.093)

Fig 3 Push angles for (A) SLOP and (B) ARC propulsion patterns. A smaller push angle is typically seen with the ARC propulsion pattern. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 935-942DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.08.093)

Fig 4 Work loss effect. Moment versus time plot for a typical MS and SCI subject. The left circle highlights hand and pushrim contact, and the right circle highlights hand and pushrim release. Note that a propulsive moment is negative and a braking moment is positive because of lab coordinate system. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 935-942DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.08.093)