Evaluation of selected ultralight manual wheelchairs using ANSI/RESNA standards

To provide data for clinicians and wheelchair users to compare the durability, strength, stability, and cost effectiveness of four different ultralight wheelchair models, and to compare the results of this study with those published for lightweight wheelchairs.

Standards testing and cost-effectiveness analysis of four wheelchair models from different manufacturers (12 wheelchairs total).

There were significant differences (p< or =.05) in the fatigue life and value (equivalent cycles per dollar) among the ultralight wheelchairs tested. There was also a significant difference (p< or =.05) in rearward stability tilt angle for the least and most stable configurations. There were no differences in forward and lateral stability. The ultralight wheelchairs (1,009,108 cycles) had significantly (p< or =.05) higher fatigue lives than previously reported for lightweight wheelchairs (187,370 cycles). The lightweight wheelchairs had a mean value of 210 cycles per dollar compared to 673 cycles per dollar for the ultralight wheelchairs. The difference in value for the lightweight and ultralight wheelchairs was statistically significant (p< or =.05).

There were differences in the fatigue life and value among the four models of ultralight manual wheelchairs tested. This indicates that ultralight manual wheelchairs are not all of equal quality. The fatigue life and value of the ultralight manual wheelchairs were significantly higher than those previously reported for lightweight manual wheelchairs. This indicates that ultralight wheelchairs may be of higher quality than lightweight manual wheelchairs. Clinicians and consumers should seriously consider selecting an ultralight manual wheelchair to meet their wheelchair mobility needs.