A Survey to Support the Development of an Interface Device for Integrated Control of Power Wheelchairs, Computers, and Other Devices

Katya Hill, Barry Romich,Edmund LoPresti, Donald Spaeth,
Jennifer Thiel, Rick Creech, Douglas Hobson

RERC on Wheeled Mobility
University of Pittsburgh

Slide 1
A Survey to Support the Development of an Interface Device for Integrated Control of Power Wheelchairs, Computers, and Other Devices

Katya Hill, Barry Romich,Edmund LoPresti, Donald Spaeth,
Jennifer Thiel, Rick Creech, Douglas Hobson

RERC on Wheeled Mobility
University of Pittsburgh
http://www.rerc.pitt.edu/

Slide 2
Scope of the Project

Many people who use powered wheelchairs can benefit from using the wheelchair controller to operate other functions. This project is exploring new options for implementing this function with improved performance over traditional approaches.

Slide 3
Distributed Controls and Integrated Controls

Graphic description: This drawing illustrates the difference between distributed controls and integrated controls. It contains two cartoon drawings of a consumer sitting in a wheelchair. In each drawing, four blocks are drawn representing four different assistive devices. The blocks are labeled wheelchair, AAC device, ECU system and Computer. In the first drawing, labeled distributed controls, the consumer is frowning because he must use a separate control for each of his assistive technology devices. In the second drawing, labeled integrated controls, the consumer is smiling because one single control will operate all four of his asssistive technology devices.

Slide 4
Elements of the Project: Survey

Slide 5
Objective & Methods

Purpose was to collect and analyze data on issues considered essential in the design of a prototype integrated controller.

Developed web-based Likert-type survey.

All recruitment, consent, and completion conducted through email and Internet.

Slide 6
Results

14 Respondents

• Professionals (clinicians, manufacturer, supplier)
• Researchers
• Consumers
  

100% agreement on usefulness of integrated device

Slide 7
Results: Functions/options that should be performed by an integrated controller

Graphic Description: a table that shows survey responses to the functions and options that should be performed by the integrated controller. 92% of the respondents wanted computer access. 54% wanted ECU (environmental control unit) and EADL (electronic aids to daily living) control. 38% wanted AAC (alternative and augmentative communication) control. 31% wanted wheelchair access. 23% wanted switch/scanning control.

Slide 8
Results

Identification of communication protocols for use or access: Universal Serial Bus (USB), Apple Desktop Bus (ADB), Infrared (IRDA), parallel port/serial port (RS232), Radio Frequency (IEEE standards or Bluetooth), General Input Device Emulating Interface (GIDEI).

Safety concerns: clear indication of use; immediate "kill switch" or emergency shut off; backup/emergency access; interference with other devices.

Survey confirmed the market interest in integrated controls.

Acknowledgement

This work was performed under funding from the National Institute for Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR).

RERC on Wheeled Mobility
University of Pittsburgh

http://www.rerc.pitt.edu/

The End

Return to Slide Series

Updated: March 12, 2002