Technical Report AMI-002:

Review of 2004-2005 RERC-AMI National Student Design Competition: Ergometers

Author: Elizabeth Omiatek, B.B.E.

Coordinating Editor: Jack Winters, Ph.D.

Location: Medical Device Accessibility & Usability Laboratory

Current Version: 1.0 (March 2006)

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

During the 2004-2005 academic year, six engineering student design teams from across the country participated in a National Student Design Competition in the area of accessible ergometer design. This particular competition was one of three categories sponsored by the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Accessible Medical Instrumentation (RERC-AMI), which in total involved 16 participating universities providing 19 total designs. Each of the 6 universities that participated in the accessible ergometer design competition strived to design a novel prototype of an exercise bike that would accommodate persons with a variety of disabilities, as reflected by "personas" that purposely spanned hypothetical individuals with a diversity of disabilities. This review focuses on the innovative device features that were added to or integrated into each ergometer design prototype by these student teams so as to enhance accessibility. It is seen that a number of the concepts proposed by students hold promise, suggesting the need for a research study aimed at using systematic usability analysis (involving subjects with a diversity of abilities) to better understand how such features impact on product accessibility and human performance.

Background

As has been documented through national surveys, focus groups and usability evaluations by the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Accessible Medical Instrumentation (RERC-AMI), inaccessible medical instrumentation often denies people with disabilities the right to receive or provide adequate healthcare services (e.g., see the R1 Needs Analysis web site at http://www.rerc-ami.org/ami/projects/r/1/, or the various publications by Jill Winters et al. that are provided at http://www.rerc-ami.org/ami/pubs/). Approximately nineteen percent of people over age five living in the United States have some type of disability or lasting condition, and most of these individuals require healthcare services.

One of the top five areas to emerge from the national consumer survey was exercise and rehabilitation equipment. It has been shown that exercise improves cardiovascular endurance and reduces disease risks (e.g., Chakravarthy and Booth; McCown et al., 2004). Some of these disease risks include cardiovascular disease, hypertension, colon cancer, and type 2 diabetes. As well as reducing the risk of depression, physical activity decreases the chances of obesity and osteoporosis and enhances everyday quality of life. Also, exercise is necessary to regain range of motion and strength after suffering from many injuries, and it if often necessary to maintain joint flexibility.

During the 2004-2005 academic year, six engineering senior design teams from across the country competed in a National Student Design Competition in the area of accessible ergometer design. This competition, sponsored by the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Accessible Medical Instrumentation (RERC-AMI), was coordinated through a subcontract from Marquette University to the University of Connecticut, with 19 universities competing in three categories. Each of the universities that participated in the accessible ergometer design competition strived to design a novel prototype of an exercise bike that would accommodate persons with a variety of disabilities. The specific aims and specifications, extracted from the flier of the competition, follow:

Aim: A creative cycle ergometer that is usable by individuals with a diversity of abilities.

Specs: It must be easy to get into, feel stable, be easy to adjust even with low strength or flexibility, have an easy-to-view display, and be targeted for under $1000 retail. (Can start with existing unit, if less than $500 retail.)

Clients: Joan, Lloyd, Sophia, Arnold, Wanda, Bob

The "clients" were "personas" that purposely spanned hypothetical individuals who possessed a range of functional impairments, including fragile with past history of heart failure (Joan), deaf (Wanda), blind (Bob, Wanda's father), had Parkinson's disease (Arnold), had stroke-induced hemiplegia (Sophia), had diabetes with low vision and overweight (Lloyd). See http://www.rerc-ami.org/ami/projects/d/2/2/year2/ for a complete description of these personas and rules for the 2004-2005 competition. The goal of each added device feature was to address anticipated accessibility challenges. In addition to their own experiences with design education at their home campuses, teams had access to resource information on accessible design and on universal design considerations (e.g., Equitable Use, Flexibility in Use, Simple and Intuitive to Use, Perceptible Information, Tolerance for Error, Low Physical Effort, Size and Space for Approach and Use).

Finally, this competition also focused on an overall design that was economical and marketable to healthcare providers as well as home users. The maximum budget for each project was $2,000.

Survey of Prototypes

The Product Table compares five of the designs entered in the National Design Competition (one of the six original web sites was removed prior to this survey of prototypes). Each device feature is rated or categorized and additional features are presented in the last column. Each design is linked to the corresponding university homepage as well as the website each design team built.

It is interesting that although each team was given the same general objectives and personas, each ergometer was different and incorporated different device features. This demonstrates the creativity of these student design teams, and the reality that there are numerous alternative solutions. Note that the bottom row of the table provides comments to summarize key accessibility features.

The table also includes the following rating system (1-3):

Ease of adjustment for positioning is another aspect of the ergometer that was rated with the following one to three rating system:

The user ability row is designed to present which types of individuals with disabilities would be able to use the new design. The abbreviations for each disability are included in Appendix A.

Evaluation of Designs

After each design was complete and entered, in June 2005 a collection of judges scored each design, and awards were assigned to what were considered the top designs. Overall, the design that received first prize both in this category and overall was the VersErg, which was developed by 4 students at the University of Rochester. This design included the following accessibility features:

The other ergometer that was rewarded with second place in this category and fourth overall was the Accessible Ergometer designed by Team Ergo, 4 students at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. This design incorporated the following accessibility features:

These two designs were judged as the two best in the ergometer category, however each team introduced new accessibility design features that are not common in today's market of medical devices.

Recommendations

There are a number of promising accessibility features and ideas for designs that can be recommended for continued R&D. These features include moveable handlebars, Braille labeling, a rotating seat that is easy to adjust relative to the crank, and an interactive audio interface.

To date these designs have been used by only a limited number of individuals with disabilities. Furthermore, a recent focus group on exercise ergometers by the RERC has shown that there are a diversity of user needs and preferences, as well as abilities. More research must be conducted through human subject testing to develop a universally accessible ergometer. An example is the thesis project of this author, Elizabeth Omiatek, which involves incorporating a number of the design features described in the table into a novel design. This new design purposely includes the provision of several options for many features so that users with a diversity of abilities and preferences. It is undergoing systematic evaluation for a diversity of users with disabilities.

Acknowledgment

This work is supported by the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Accessible Medical Instrumentation, funded by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, U.S. Department of Education Grant #H133E020729. All opinions are those of the authors.

References

Chakravarthy, M., Booth, F. (2003) Exercise. Philadelphia , PA : Hanley & Belfus.

McCown, K., Martin, J., Forest, S., Carter, M. (2004) Exercise and Fitness for Adults with Developmental Disabilites: Case Report of a Group Intervention. Arlington : Therapeutic Recreational Journal

RERC-AMI: D2.2: Student Desitn Competition, see http://www.rerc-ami.org/ami/projects/d/2/2/year2/rules/\

Appendix A – Coding for Table

User Abilities (Impairments) Reference:

Ease of Adjustment Reference:

Tonal Reference:

Target Aims Reference:

Training Required Reference: