Evaluating the physical demands when using sled-type stair descent devices to evacuate mobility-limited occupants from high-rise buildings

• Published in: Applied ergonomics 2015-09, Vol.50, p.87-97
• Main Authors: Lavender, Steven A., Mehta, Jay P., Hedman, Glenn E., Park, Sanghyun, Reichelt, Paul A., Conrad, Karen M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Biomechanical Phenomena - physiology; Electromyography; Emergencies; EMS/firefighter; Equipment Design; Evacuating individuals with dissabilities; Evacuations & rescues; Firefighters; Friction; Healthcare facility evacuation; Heart Rate - physiology; High rise buildings; Human factors research; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mobility Limitation; Movement; Performance evaluation; Physical Exertion - physiology; Simulation; Staircases
• ISSN: 0003-6870; 1872-9126
• DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2015.02.008

The physical demands on evacuators were investigated when using different types of sled-type stair descent devices designed for the emergency evacuation of high rise buildings. Twelve firefighters used six sled-type stair descent devices during simulated evacuations. The devices were evaluated under two staircase width conditions (1.12, and 1.32 m). Dependent measures included electromyographic (EMG) data, heart rates, Borg Scale ratings, and descent velocities. All stair descent speeds were below those reported during pedestrian egress trials. With the exception of the inflatable device, the devices operated by two evacuators had higher descent speeds than those operated by a single evacuator. High friction materials under the sleds facilitated control and reduced the muscle demands on stairs but increased physical demands on the landings. Usability assessments found devices with shorter overall lengths had fewer wall contacts on the landing, and handles integrated in the straps were preferred by the evacuators. •We simulated evacuating people with motor disabilities from high-rise buildings.•This study compared 6 sled-type devices designed for stair descent.•Surface EMG, heart rate, trunk motion, and perceived exertion data were collected.•There are significant differences across devices, particularly on the landings.•Two-evacuator devices, did well on biomechanics, evacuation speed, and usability.