• Sue Hignett, Joseph Wayne Willmott, and Stacy Clemes.
• Healthcare Ergonomics and Patient Safety Unit, Dept of Human Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, Leicestershire LE11 3TU, UK. S.M.Hignett@lboro.ac.uk
• Work. 2009 Jan 1; 34 (2): 215-22.

AbstractIn the UK mountain rescues are carried out by highly trained volunteers in all weather conditions and at any time of the day/night. They interface with other services when they hand over the casualty to either land or air ambulances. The design of the stretcher is important to the safety of both the volunteers and casualties. This paper reports a usability trial to evaluate the features of mountain rescue stretchers and identify characteristics for future design. Two mountain rescue teams in the English Lake District participated in a five week field experiment. Data were collected using postural analysis with Rapid Entire Body Analysis, Body Part Discomfort Surveys, Rated Perceived Exertion and focus groups to compare the performance of four stretchers: Split Thomas, Ferno Titan, MacInnes mark 6 and MacInnes mark 7. None of the stretchers had an overall advantage, with benefits for some features counterbalanced by disadvantages resulting from others. All the stretchers produced shoulder discomfort with the Split Thomas and MacInnes 6 lowering the postural risks through the use of skids/wheel in the carrying phase. The key design features for future MR stretchers include: reduced unloaded weight (e.g. light weight materials and mesh platforms); undercarriage system to reduce the carrying load; adjustable handles at the front and back positions; flexible carrying system with an optional harness attachment; ease of assembly in adverse environmental conditions; large carrying capacity. It is suggested that military emergency evacuation should be considered in addition to mountain rescue tasks to identify a larger commercial market for development.

13 keywords...

hide…