Presentation
Enhancing EMS Safety Using Exoskeleton Devices to Prevent Back Injury
SessionRobotics Summit - Session 3
DescriptionBackground:
The Emergency Medical Services (EMS) profession has one of the highest injury rates among all occupations, with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) from patient lifting and equipment moving being a major contributing factor. Exoskeletons have emerged as a potential ergonomic intervention to reduce physical strain, but their adoption in EMS remains limited due to concerns about usability, comfort, and workflow integration. Our study evaluates the usability and acceptance of a passive low-back exoskeleton among EMS providers during common field tasks.
Methods:
This research employs a two-session study, with Session 1 focusing on usability evaluation through participant feedback, task-specific surveys, and open-ended interviews. EMS professionals perform five representative tasks—including stair climbing with gear, CPR, manikin dragging, backboard lifting, and barbell stair climbing—while wearing a passive exoskeleton. Participants complete multiple task sequences, interspersed with standardized breaks, and provide immediate subjective ratings on perceived exertion, discomfort, and task performance. At the session’s conclusion, broader usability metrics are assessed via the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE), Rate of Perceived Discomfort (RPD), and NASA TLX surveys, followed by semi-structured interviews to gather deeper insights on workflow integration and user acceptance.
Results & Key Takeaways:
The primary objective of Session 1 is to assess how well the exoskeleton integrates into EMS workflows and identify barriers to adoption. Key outcomes include identifying specific tasks where the exoskeleton enhances performance versus those where it may hinder movement, evaluating comfort levels, and determining the influence of task-specific concerns (e.g., confined space maneuverability). The qualitative interviews provide nuanced insights into EMS professionals' willingness to adopt the device, with a focus on perceived benefits, risks, and practical challenges in real-world settings.
Conclusion:
This usability study is crucial for bridging the gap between exoskeleton technology and real-world EMS applications. By directly incorporating EMS workers' feedback, our findings will inform ergonomic interventions and device improvements to facilitate widespread adoption in the field. The results will contribute to ongoing discussions on occupational safety and injury prevention strategies in high-risk emergency response environments.
The Emergency Medical Services (EMS) profession has one of the highest injury rates among all occupations, with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) from patient lifting and equipment moving being a major contributing factor. Exoskeletons have emerged as a potential ergonomic intervention to reduce physical strain, but their adoption in EMS remains limited due to concerns about usability, comfort, and workflow integration. Our study evaluates the usability and acceptance of a passive low-back exoskeleton among EMS providers during common field tasks.
Methods:
This research employs a two-session study, with Session 1 focusing on usability evaluation through participant feedback, task-specific surveys, and open-ended interviews. EMS professionals perform five representative tasks—including stair climbing with gear, CPR, manikin dragging, backboard lifting, and barbell stair climbing—while wearing a passive exoskeleton. Participants complete multiple task sequences, interspersed with standardized breaks, and provide immediate subjective ratings on perceived exertion, discomfort, and task performance. At the session’s conclusion, broader usability metrics are assessed via the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE), Rate of Perceived Discomfort (RPD), and NASA TLX surveys, followed by semi-structured interviews to gather deeper insights on workflow integration and user acceptance.
Results & Key Takeaways:
The primary objective of Session 1 is to assess how well the exoskeleton integrates into EMS workflows and identify barriers to adoption. Key outcomes include identifying specific tasks where the exoskeleton enhances performance versus those where it may hinder movement, evaluating comfort levels, and determining the influence of task-specific concerns (e.g., confined space maneuverability). The qualitative interviews provide nuanced insights into EMS professionals' willingness to adopt the device, with a focus on perceived benefits, risks, and practical challenges in real-world settings.
Conclusion:
This usability study is crucial for bridging the gap between exoskeleton technology and real-world EMS applications. By directly incorporating EMS workers' feedback, our findings will inform ergonomic interventions and device improvements to facilitate widespread adoption in the field. The results will contribute to ongoing discussions on occupational safety and injury prevention strategies in high-risk emergency response environments.
Event Type
Robotics Workshop Submission
TimeSunday, March 301:15pm - 1:45pm EDT
LocationHarbour A/B