User evaluation of three wheelchair securement systems in large accessible transit vehicles

Abstract

Abstract-Ease of use, comfort, security, and independent use of three types of wheelchair securement systems were evaluated in a large accessible transit vehicle by 20 wheelchair and scooter users. The securement systems included a 4-point tie-down system, a prototype autodocking system, and a prototype rear-facing wheelchair passenger (RF-WP) system. Study participants took a 15-minute city ride and completed a survey. Participants responded positively to the autodocking and RF-WP systems that were quicker and easier to use and allowed more independent use than the 4-point tie-down system (p < 0.001). There was concern regarding the RF-WP system that rear-facing travel made it more difficult to see upcoming stops and was less comfortable than a forward-facing ride and that the system may damage wheelchair wheels during use. The majority of participants preferred using an autodocking system because it allowed secure and independent forward-facing travel. Participants found it undesirable, however, that a wheelchair-mounted docking adaptor was needed to use the autodocking system. Study results indicate a need for improved securement systems for forward-facing use that do not require a wheelchair adaptation and can be easily and independently used by wheelchair and scooter users.

Transit Operator Evaluation of Three Wheelchair Securement Systems in a Large Accessible Transit Vehicle

“…Research remains ongoing to understand the safety of the various securement systems during normal and emergency driving maneuvers in LATVs van Roosmalen et al 2011). Shaw (2008) found that public transportation is a very safe mode of transportation and accidents due to vehicle crashes are rare.…”

“…It also aims to listen to the voice of the customer (operators, passengers) when selecting technologies for the fast pace environment of modern public transportation. This study is part of a broader study where wheelchair-and scooter-seated individuals were surveyed and asked for their perceived safety, comfort, and independence when using three types of wheelchair securement stations on board an LATV (Turkovich et al 2009;van Roosmalen et al 2011). The results in this publication are focused on operators of LATVs and their perceived ease of use of three types of wheelchair securement stations.…”

Consequences of four-point, strap-type wheelchair tiedown and occupant restraint system practices on wheelchair passenger safety in fixed-route transit.

“…Current research is underway to identify alternative solutions to wheelchair securement in a low-g environment (< 1g). These alternative solutions include forward-facing 22 and rear-facing 17 wheelchair passenger stations and auto-docking systems 18 . They offer improved ease of use and may exhibit reduced frequencies of disuse and misuse in comparison to the strap-type, 4-point WTORS systems.…”

“…Reported disuse and misuse of four-point, strap-type tiedowns and occupant restraint systems (ORS) in the LATV low-g environment may be evidence that these WTORS are not user friendly and do not allow for wheelchair passenger independence with respect to wheelchair securement and passenger restraint. Alternative solutions to wheelchair securement or retention such as auto-docking 18 and rear-facing stations 17 are being investigated in an attempt to increase ease of use and independence for wheelchair passenger securement and restraint.…”

“…These alternative solutions include forward-facing wheelchair passenger stations 22 and auto-docking systems 18 , both of which offer improved ease of use and may exhibit reduced frequencies of disuse and misuse in comparison to the straptype, 4-point wheelchair tiedown and occupant restraint systems. One study 17 found that wheelchair passengers prefer auto-docking systems compared to 4-pont, belt type wheelchair tiedown and occupant restraint systems in LATV transit. Alternatives to traditional strap-type, 4-point WTORS also offer a more independent approach for wheelchair securement or retention, but additional research is needed to demonstrate their feasibility and provision of safety.…”