The Characterization and Evaluation of an Intervention to Reduce Neonate Whole Body Vibration Exposures During Ambulance Transport

  • Dawn M. RyanEmail author
  • Adam Lokeh
  • David Hirschman
  • June Spector
  • Rob Parker
  • Peter W. Johnson
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 820)


Newborn infants delivered in a compromised health state often require transport between secondary and primary care hospitals. The objective of this study was to measure and characterize the WBV exposures during simulated newborn infant inter-hospital ground transport and determine how vehicle-based vibration is transmitted through the chain of equipment used to support newborn infants and whether there is a need and potential for mitigation of these exposures. A simulated newborn infant was transported over a 46-min, 32 km route between two hospitals to simulate a typical transport route. The route was completed with a standard transport system as well as a new, modified vibration dampening transport system. The average-weighted vibrations and the vibration dose values were calculated. Relative to the floor measured vibration (0.36 m/s2), the standard transport system amplified the average weighted vibration through the chain of equipment nearly doubling the vibration at the interface where the simulated neonate rested (0.67 m/s2). With the new system, the vibration at the point just above the suspension system was almost half (0.25 m/s2) of the floor measured vibration (0.44 m/s2), but then increased to a maximum of 0.48 m/s2 at the interface where the simulated neonate rested. Results were similar for VDV exposures. When comparing the two systems, the standard stretcher amplified the floor measured vibration by 86% whereas the new stretcher system with the built-in suspension amplified the vibration by just 9%. Options for further investigation and mitigation of vibration in future studies is discussed.


Action limit Exposure limit Average-weighted vibration VDV 


  1. 1.
    Shah S, Rothberger A, Caprio M, Mally P, Hendricks-Munoz K (2008) Quantification of impulse experienced by neonates during inter- and intra-hospital transport measured by biophysical accelerometery. J. Perinat. Med. 36:87–92. Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shenai JP, Johnson GE, Varney RV (1981) Mechanical vibration in neonatal transport. Pediatrics 68(1):55–57Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grosek S, Mlakar G, Vidmar I, Ihan A, Primozic J (2009) Heart rate and leukocytes after air and ground transportation in artificially ventilated neonates: a prospective observational study. Intensive Care Med. 35(1):161–165. Scholar
  4. 4.
    International Standards Organization. ISO 2631-1 (1997) Mechanical vibration and shock-Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration-Par1-General Requirements, ISOGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    European Union (2002) Directive 2002/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2002 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (vibration) (sixteenth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blood RP, Rynell PW, Johnson PW (2011) Vehicle design influences whole body vibration exposures: effect of the location of the front axle relative to the cab. J Occup Environ Hyg 8(6):364–374. Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sherwood HB, Donze A, Giebe J (1994) Mechanical vibration in ambulance transport. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Neonatal. Nurs. 23(6):457–463. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Washington, School of Public HealthSeattleUSA
  2. 2.Children’s MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  3. 3.Bose CorporationFraminghamUSA

Personalised recommendations