The robotized workstation "MASTER" for users with tetraplegia ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Age Groups < 20 13 (Average = 32.7) 20-29 30 (NA = 1) 30-39 20 40-49 16 > 50 11 Sex Male 65 Female 26 Educational Level Primary school 13 Secondary 53 school University 25 Activity Employed 4 NA = 7 Students 21 Unemployed 59 Living Situations Married 23 NA = 4 Alone 33 In the family 31 Location Home 39 NA = 1 Specialized 7 institution Hospital 44 Disabilities Spinal injuries 50 Muscular 17 dystrophy Cerebral 11 diseases* Brain trauma 7 Spinal or 6 cerebral trunk degeneration Dependency Dressing 90 Toilet 90 Taking meals 79 Drinking 78 Mobility Electric 75 wheelchair Manual 14 wheelchair Difficult 2 walking Driving car 7 Communication Normal 86 speaking Voice 5 synthesis Assistance 72 with writing Technical aids ECS 72 Hands-free 66 telephone PC 43 No. = Number; NA = No answer; < = less than; > = greater than; * cerebral palsy, SEP, etc.
Evaluation Duration Each workstation has been evaluated during one year and then removed to another site for one year. Each evaluation included a time for training and adapting the OI, the durations of which are reported in Figure 4; the evaluation time is reported in Table 3. Table 3. Evaluation duration. Evaluation Duration # of users % of users 1 to 5 days 28 31 6 to 10 days 42 46 11 to 15 days 12 13 16 to 20 days 4 4 21 to 25 days 0 0 26 to 30 days 1 1 31 to 35 days 1 1 > 35 days 1 1 No answer 2 2 # = Number; % = percentage; the average duration was 8.3 days, ignoring one evaluation center, which has evaluated the system with only one user during 180 days. SEP, etc. Summary of the Results There were no instances wherein the user with disability could not use the system. Results of tasks evaluated by the 10 APPROCHE sites are reported in Tables 4,5, and 6. Eighty-six percent of the subjects considered the training "easy." Seventy-five percent of the subjects considered access to the control station "well-designed," although 64 percent of the users felt that a second control station was necessary in order to separate the different functions (leisure, office, domestic), in order to have better visibility of each part of the station or to use the station in a recumbent position. Table 4. Evaluation of office tasks. Office Task No. 1 PIR 2 IEU 3 SI 4 Diskette insertion in the PC 88 2.85 3.63 3.56 drive Grasping a book 71 3.04 3.49 3.35 Grasping paper sheets 68 3.00 3.75 3.43 Setting a book on the reader 65 3.25 3.60 3.55 board CD ROM insertion in the driver 59 2.66 3.51 3.36 Turning paper sheet on the 59 2.27 3.32 2.22 reader board Throwing paper in a waste bin 57 2.84 3.65 3.51 Turning book pages 49 1.90 2.84 1.69 Setting and removing paper 48 3.21 3.77 3.73 sheets in/from the printer Grasping card from a box 32 2.90 3.50 3.25 Grasping a big sheet sorter 27 2.85 3.52 3.07 Stapling paper sheets 27 2.67 3.33 2.85 Setting paper sheets on a table 24 2.88 3.67 3.67 Grasping a pencil 17 2.24 3.59 3.41 Making photocopies 10 3.10 3.90 3.90 Filling the printer with paper sheets 10 2.50 3.50 3.30
Page 1 and 2: Vol. 36 No. 3 July 1999 The robotiz
Page 3 and 4: Figure 1. General view of the MASTE
Page 5 and 6: ● assignments for each function e
Page 7 and 8: The following items were assessed b
Page 9: configuring the ECS, and the progra
Page 13 and 14: Shaving 9 1.11 2.89 1.67 Brushing t
Page 15: Back to Top

The robotized workstation "MASTER" for users with tetraplegia ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?