OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine how the Segway compares to clients' current method of mobility in meeting their specific mobility goals. DESIGN: This study included 10 subjects (aged 19-65 yrs) with a wide range of disabilities (e.g., multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, and amputee) who were able to walk at least 6 m with or without assistance. Subjects navigated a 25-m obstacle course at our provincial adult rehabilitation center with their current mobility devices and then the Segway. The outcome measures used were the Wheelchair Outcome Measure score and the difference in the time required to complete the obstacle course. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in Wheelchair Outcome Measure score between subjects' current mobility method and using the Segway for client specific goals (P < 0.01); however, there was no significant difference between obstacle course times. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that the Segway may be a good device for people with disabilities because it allows them to participate in social and functional activities in a manner that traditional mobility aids do not facilitate as well. However, it does have its limitations and should be considered as just one of the many mobility options offered to people with disabilities.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine how the Segway compares to clients' current method of mobility in meeting their specific mobility goals. DESIGN: This study included 10 subjects (aged 19-65 yrs) with a wide range of disabilities (e.g., multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, and amputee) who were able to walk at least 6 m with or without assistance. Subjects navigated a 25-m obstacle course at our provincial adult rehabilitation center with their current mobility devices and then the Segway. The outcome measures used were the Wheelchair Outcome Measure score and the difference in the time required to complete the obstacle course. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in Wheelchair Outcome Measure score between subjects' current mobility method and using the Segway for client specific goals (P < 0.01); however, there was no significant difference between obstacle course times. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that the Segway may be a good device for people with disabilities because it allows them to participate in social and functional activities in a manner that traditional mobility aids do not facilitate as well. However, it does have its limitations and should be considered as just one of the many mobility options offered to people with disabilities.