• 재활복지
• /
• v.22 no.3
• /
• pp.225-257
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this study is to find the application point of hearing augmentation technology development through examining the risk context experience of people with hearing impairment and the use of assistive device used as an alternative technology. Data of 355 people with hearing impairment with official disability grading was analyzed. The results of this study are first, research participants had no experience of recognizing any sound or vibration in situations highest in the order of means of transportation, material, and nature. Especially the ratio of being unable to recognize the sound and vibration of means of transportation was high, which implies the high possibility of people with hearing impairment experiencing risk. Secondly, the risk context that people with hearing impairment will most likely to experience are highest in the order of traffic accident, pedestrian accident, and daily life at home. Thirdly, the recognition of 2G phone/smart phone, vibrating digital alarm clock, light bar, vibrating wrist watch as assistive device for risk context awareness and notification was high and the satisfaction level of 2G phone/smart phone was the highest. Fourthly, the research participants had high recognition of assistive device for communication in the order of hearing aid, smart phone, videophone, cochlear implant and 2G phone and it was found that the satisfaction level and communication improvement level was the highest using the smart phone. Lastly, for the development of hearing augmentation technology the research participants recognized the importance of portable/wear convenience, price, and motion accuracy and for notification delivery means they preferred the method of using sight(text and light). Based on the results of this study policy and practical plans for hearing augmentation technology development for people with hearing impairment in risk context are proposed.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.259-278
• /
• 2002

This study divided straight success, pade success and failure with 7male golfers who have experiences more than 3 years, analyzed kinematic factors of golf swing to suggest scientifically. The conclusions were follows. 1) The wrist angle has significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 2) The body twist angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 3) The shoulder joint rotation angle has no significant difference in success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 4) The left hip joint vertical angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 5) The hip joint rotation angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 6) The trunk angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 7 )The left knee joint angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. This study divided golf swing motion of pattern change in straight success, pade success and failure and analyzed the kinematic factors by 3-dimension cinematography to improve performance. In the future, many researchers have to study kinematic analysis to improve performance in every events.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.36
• /
• pp.93-109
• /
• 2013

This research is mainly based on the experimental result due to seek different outcomes whena certain security motion with a paticular gear is applied in a plausible confrontational situation. For the purpose of this research an Expandable Baton, which is one of the most commonsecurity equipments, was chosen to be applied in a situation of hitting a person's head. Alsothe results will be studied in the view of Kinematic theory. To demonstrate, 10 students who were majeored in Escort Crane studies at 'H' university werechosen as testees. The participants were grouped into two-one is practiced with the 'expanadable baton use program' and the other is pre-practiced. In this report two groups abovewill be reffered as 'group A' and 'group B' for conveniency. There were a number of differences and changes between two groups. Group B took more timethan the other group did. Group A spent about 0.428sec in section 'e2' and 0.230sec in section'e3' while Group B took 0.435sec, 0.232sec in each sections.To add on, more distinctive results were out when it was more focused on physical movements. Two gropus presented considerable changes- in an 'left-right' moving displacement-Group A;$2.16{\pm}0.9cm$ (left side), $3.78{\pm}1.42cm$ (right side), total $5.94{\pm}2.03cm$. Group B; $2.97{\pm}1.01cm$ (left side),$4.56{\pm}1.57cm$ (right side), total $7.53{\pm}2.13cm$.Continuously, different outcomeswere shown between two groups in a 'back and forth' moving displacement-Group A;$32.48{\pm}3.86cm$, $35.21{\pm}4.64cm$, total $69.36{\pm}5.72$. Group B; $34.50{\pm}6.12cm$, $37.04{\pm}3.70cm$, total $71.46{\pm}7.17cm$. Furthermore, changes in an 'up and down' moving displacement were - GroupA; $5.62{\pm}2.41cm$, $4.54{\pm}1.87cm$, total $10.11{\pm}1.57cm$. Group B; $6.33{\pm}1.78cm$, $4.86{\pm}1.85cm$,total $10.68{\pm}1.81cm$. To continue, there were few modifications of degree on participants' joints, espcially on 'Wristjoint', 'Elbow joint' and 'Shoulder joint', depend on different sections -Wrist joint;Group A; e1 $114.62{\pm}7.13$, e2 $68.27{\pm}6.37$, e3 $131.64{\pm}6.27$. Group B; e1 $112.62{\pm}6.13$, e2 $66.28{\pm}7.38$, e3$137.42{\pm}4.28$ and Elbow joint ; Group A e1 $132.31{\pm}6.55$, e2 $117.92{\pm}8.42$, e3 $144.41{\pm}6.32$. Group B; e1 $133.58{\pm}8.56$, e2 $114.45{\pm}8.21$, e3 $139.89{\pm}4.38$. Lastly, degree changes ofshoulder joint were; Group A; e1 $13.55{\pm}3.85$, e2 $131.42{\pm}11.24$, e3 $78.32{\pm}6.28$. Group B; e1$9.45{\pm}1.23$, e2 $136.74{\pm}13.21$, e3 $79.75{\pm}4.24$.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.84-89
• /
• 2013

Purpose: Patients' movement during long image acquisition time for the fusion image of PET-CT (Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography) results in unconformity, and greatly affects the quality of the image and diagnosis. The arm support fixtures provided by medical device companies are not manufactured considering the convenience and safety of the patients; the arm and head movements (horizontal and vertical) during PET/CT scan cause defects in the brain fundus images and often require retaking. Therefore, this study aims to develop patient-compensation device that would minimize the head and arm movements during PET/CT scan, providing comfort and safety, and to reduce retaking. Materials and Methods: From June to July 2012, 20 patients who had no movement-related problems and another 20 patients who had difficulties in raising arms due to shoulder pain were recruited among the ones who visited nuclear medicine department for PET Torso scan. By using Patient Holding System (PHS), different range of motion (ROM) in the arm ($25^{\circ}$, $27^{\circ}$, $29^{\circ}$, $31^{\circ}$, $33^{\circ}$, $35^{\circ}$) was applied to find the most comfortable angle and posture. The manufacturing company was investigated for the permeability of the support material, and the comfort level of applying bands (velcro type) to fix the patient's head and arms was evaluated. To find out the retake frequency due to movements, the amount of retake cases pre/post patient-compensation were analyzed using the PET Torso scan data collected between January to December 2012. Results: Among the patients without movement disorder, 18 answered that PHS and $29^{\circ}$ arm ROM were the most comfortable, and 2 answered $27^{\circ}$ and $31^{\circ}$, respectively. Among the patients with shoulder pain, 15 picked $31^{\circ}$ as the most comfortable angle, 2 picked $33^{\circ}$, and 3 picked $35^{\circ}$. For this study, the handle was manufactured to be adjustable for vertical movements. The material permeability of the patient-compensation device has been verified, and PHS and the compensation device were band-fixed (velcro type) to prevent device movements. A furrow was cut for head fixation to minimize the head and neck movements, fixing bands were attached for the head, wrist, forearm, and upper arm to limit movements. The retake frequency of PET Torso scan due to patient movements was 11.06% (191 cases/1,808 patients) before using the movement control device, and 2.65% (48 cases/1,732 patients) after using the device; 8.41% of the frequency was reduced. Conclusion: Recent change and innovation in the medical environment are making expensive medical image scans, and providing differentiated services for the customers is essential. To secure patient comfort and safety during PET/CT scans, ergonomic patient-compensation devices need to be provided. Therefore, this study manufactured a patientcompensation device with vertically adjustable ergonomic ROM according to the patient's body shape and condition during PET Torso scan. The defects in the basal ganglia images due to arm movements were reduced, and retaking was decreased.