Detection of Wheelchair User Activities Using Wearable Sensors

  • Dan Ding
  • Shivayogi Hiremath
  • Younghyun Chung
  • Rory Cooper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6767)


Wearable sensors are increasingly used to monitor and quantify physical activity types and levels in a real-life environment. In this project we studied the activity classification in manual wheelchair users using wearable sensors. Twenty-seven subjects performed a series of representative activities of daily living in a semi-structured setting with a wheelchair propulsion monitoring device (WPMD) attached to their upper limb and their wheelchair. The WPMD included a wheel rotation datalogger that collected wheelchair movements and an eWatch that collected tri-axial acceleration on the wrist. Features were extracted from the sensors and fed into four machine learning algorithms to classify the activities into three and four categories. The results indicated that these algorithms were able to classify these activities into three categories including self propulsion, external pushing, and sedentary activity with an accuracy of 89.4-91.9%.


Activity monitors wearable sensors activity classification wheelchair users rehabilitation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Silfverskiold, J., Waters, R.L.: Shoulder pain and functional disability in spinal cord injury patients. Clin. Orthop. 272, 141–145 (1991)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sie, I.H., Waters, R.L., Adkins, R.H., Gellman, H.: Upper extremity pain in the postrehabilitation spinal cord injured patient. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 73(1), 44–48 (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Curtis, K.A., Roach, K.E., Applegate, E.B., Amar, T., Benbow, C.S., Genecco, T.D., Gualano, J.: Development of the wheelchair user’s shoulder pain index (WUSPI). Paraplegia 33(5), 290–293 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pentland, W.E., Tomey, L.T.: Upper limb function in persons with long term paraplegia and implications for independence: Part II. Paraplegia 32(4), 219–224 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    : Paralyzed Veterans of America Consortium for Spinal Cord Medicine. Preservation of Upper Limb Function Following Spinal Cord Injury: A Clinical Practice Guideline for Health-Care Professionals. J. Spinal Cord. Med. 28(5), 434–470 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pärkkä, J., Ermes, M., Antila, K., Gils, M., Mänttäri, A., Nieminen, H.: Estimating intensity of physical activity: a comparison of wearable accelerometer and gyro sensors and three sensor locations. In: 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, pp. 1511–1514 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bao, L., Intille, S.S.: Activity recognition from user-annotated acceleration data. In: Ferscha, A., Mattern, F. (eds.) PERVASIVE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3001, pp. 1–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ermes, M., Pärkka, J., Mantyjarvi, J., Korhonen, I.: Detection of daily activities and sports with wearable sensors in controlled and uncontrolled conditions. IEEE Trans. Inf. Technol. Biomed. 12(1), 20–26 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Washburn, R.A., Copay, A.G.: Assessing physical activity during wheelchair pushing: validity of a portable accelerometer. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 16(3), 290–299 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Warms, C.A., Belza, B.L.: Actigraphy as a measure of physical activity for wheelchair users with spinal cord injury. Nurs. Res. 53(2), 136–143 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tolerico, M.L., Ding, D., Cooper, R.A., Spaeth, D.M., Fitzgerald, S.G., Cooper, R., Kelleher, A., Boninger, M.L.: Assessing mobility characteristics and activity levels of manual wheelchair users. J. Rehabil. R D 44(4), 561–572 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    French, B., Tyamagundlu, D., Siewiorek, D.P., Smailagic, A., Ding, D.: Towards a virtual coach for manual wheelchair users. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Symposium on Wearable Computers, pp. 77–80 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nunn, A., McLeod, J., Brown, L., Hall, C., Orr, B., Brown, I., Ting, A., Hayes, C., Earley, P., Hawkins, R.: Monitoring spinal cord injured patients during activity using a datalogger: Preliminary results. Technology and Disability 17(2), 77–83 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Postma, K., Van den Berg-Emons, H.J.G., Bussmann, J.B.J., Sluis, T.A.R., Bergen, M.P., Stam, H.J.: Validity of the detection of wheelchair propulsion as measured with an Activity Monitor in patients with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 43(9), 550–557 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bussmann, J., Kikkert, M., Sluis, T., Bergen, M., Stam, H., Van den Berg-Emons, H.J.G.: Effect of wearing an activity monitor on the amount of daily manual wheelchair propulsion in persons with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 48(2), 128–133 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yang, R.: MATLABArsenal: A MATLAB package for classification algorithms (2006),
  17. 17.
    Hall, M.: Correlation-based Feature Selection for Machine Learning, PhD Diss. Department of Computer Science, Waikato University, Hamilton, NZ (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dan Ding
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shivayogi Hiremath
    • 1
    • 2
  • Younghyun Chung
    • 1
  • Rory Cooper
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Rehabiliation Science and TechnologyUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Human Engineering Research LaboratoriesVA Pittsburgh Healthcare SystemPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations