WO2019213785A1

WO2019213785A1 - Methods for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device, assessment tool, label and method for indicating compatibility

Info

Publication number: WO2019213785A1
Application number: PCT/CA2019/050642
Authority: WO
Inventors: Marie-Lou Joncas; Anne-Julie MORNEAU-LEBEAU; Jean-Philippe Boulianne; Christophe HANNE
Original assignee: Arjohuntleigh Magog, Inc.
Priority date: 2018-05-11
Filing date: 2019-05-13
Publication date: 2019-11-14

Abstract

A method for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system. In the method at least one property of the patient support mounting device is determined. Further, the compatibility of the patient support with the patient support mounting device is assessed on basis of the at least one determined property.

Description

METHODS FOR ASSESSING COMPATIBILITY OF A PATIENT SUPPORT WITH A PATIENT SUPPORT MOUNTING DEVICE, ASSESSMENT TOOL, LABEL AND METHOD FOR INDICATING COMPATIBILITY

Background of the invention

Field of the Invention

This invention refers to patient handling systems and specifically to methods for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system, an assessment tool, a label and a method for indicating compatibility of patient supports with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system.

Description of Related Art

Patient handling systems such as ceiling lifts and floor lifts are commonly used in health care environments to convey patients to different areas. For example, a patient handling system is used to convey a patient from a bed to a bathroom or a chair. A patient handling system may permit movement of a patient with far decreased effort of the caregiver while helping to preserve the comfort and dignity of the patient.

A patient handling system commonly comprises a lifting device. Additionally, the patient handling system may comprise a patient support for supporting the patient. The patient support may be mounted to the lifting device by a patient support mounting device. Typically, patient supports and patient support mounting devices are manufactured and sold in numerous different shapes and sizes. Depending on the patient’s size and general state, a particular patient support mounting device can only be safely used with a certain range of patient supports and is typically not compatible with patient supports that do not fall into this range. When using a certain patient support mounting device in combination with a specific patient support to lift a patient, a caregiver must always have the certitude that this combination is safe for the patient.

Thus, there is a need for a simple and reliable way of ensuring safe patient handling in a health care environment with one or more patient handling systems used in combination with a multitude of patient supports. Summary of the Invention

The present invention provides an effective concept for identifying compatible patient support and patient support mounting device combinations.

Some embodiments relate to a method for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system. In the method at least one property of the patient support mounting device is determined. Additionally, the compatibility of the patient support with the patient support mounting device is assessed on basis of the at least one determined property.

Some embodiments relate to an assessment tool for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system. The assessment tool comprises a band shaped body. Further, at least one first marker element is formed at a first surface of the body. The at least one first marker element indicates a size parameter range of the patient support in a first direction. Additionally, at least one second marker element is formed at a second surface of the body. The at least one second marker element indicates a size parameter range of the patient support in a second direction.

Some embodiments relate to a method for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system utilizing the assessment tool.

Some embodiments relate to a label for indicating compatibility of patient supports with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system. The label comprises a body. Further, at least one indicator is formed at the body. Each of the indicators indicates a size parameter range of patient supports compatible with the patient support mounting device.

Some embodiments relate to a method for indicating compatibility of patient supports with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system utilizing the label. Brief description of the drawings

The invention will now be described by way of example only, with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:

Figs la-b are illustrations of elements of a patient handling system;

Figs. 2a-b are illustrations of patient supports;

Figs. 3a-d are illustrations of patient support mounting devices;

Fig. 4 is illustrative of a method for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patent support mounting device of a patient handling system;

Fig. 5 illustrates an arrangement for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patent support mounting device of a patient handling system;

Fig. 6 illustrates an excerpt of an assessment form;

Fig. 7 illustrates an arrangement for labelling a patient support mounting device;

Figs. 8a-b illustrate another assessment form;

Figs. 9a-b illustrate an assessment tool; and

Fig. 10 illustrates another process for assessing compatibility.

Description of the disclosure

The present invention relates to methods for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system.

Specifically, the invention relates to methods, in which at least one property of the patient support mounting device is determined. More specifically, the invention relates to methods, in which the compatibility of the patient support with the patient support mounting device is assessed on basis of the at least one determined property. These and other aspects are more fully described below with reference to the appended figures.

A patient handling system commonly comprises a lifting device for lifting the patient. The lifting device may be attached to the ceiling or another elevated structure. Alternatively or additionally, the lifting device may be a floor based lifting device. Further, the patient handling system may comprise a patient support for supporting the patient. The patient support may be a sling, a harness, a basket or the like, which is put on the patient prior to lifting and/or handling the patient. To improve the patients comfort and safety, the size of the patient support is chosen such that it matches the patient’s height, waist size and/or thighs size. For example, patient supports may be manufactured in predetermined sizes, such as extra extra small (XXS), extra small (XS), small (S), medium (M), large (L), extra large (XL), and/or extra extra large (XXL). Optionally, the patient support may be formed from a flexible and tear-strong or tear- proof material such as polyester or a polyester mesh.

The patient support may be mounted to the lifting device by a patient support mounting device. The patient support mounting device may be hanger bar, a spreader bar, a lifting bar, a mounting bar or the like. To fix the patient support to the patient support mounting device, the patient support may comprise loops, which are inserted into hooks of the patient support mounting device. The hooks may further comprise latches for holding the loops in the hooks. Further, the patient support mounting device may be fixed to the lifting device using a load bearing member, such as a strap, a cable, a belt or the like.

The lifting device may further comprise a hoist assembly, which raises or lowers the patient support mounting device and thereby the patient accommodated in the patient support. The hoist assembly may be driven by a motor and/or transmission elements. For example, the hoist assembly is driven by an electric motor. The lifting device may further be connected to an electric power supply and/or to a control unit for controlling the raising and/or lowering operation of the hoist assembly. Additionally, the lifting device may be mounted on a track to allow a horizontal movement of the patient. The lifting device may be moved along the track by means of a further motor, like an electric motor, or by a caregiver. Optionally, electric power and/or

communication data from the control unit may be provided to the lifting device via the track.

Figs la and lb show non-limiting examples of elements of a patient handling system. A patient support mounting device 11 is connected via a load bearing member 12 to a lifting device 13 in Fig. la. Additionally, the lifting device 13 is connected to track 14. For example, the lifting device 13 can move along track 14 in both directions. In the example shown in Fig. la the patient support mounting device 11 may be a hanger bar and/or the load bearing member may be a strap. Fig. lb shows the patient support mounting device 11 and a patient support 15. In the example shown in Fig. lb the patient support 15 may be a sling. For example, the patient handling system is used in hospitals, care centers, nursing facilities, hospices, homes or any type of

environment, where healthcare services are provided and patient handling is performed.

Typically, patient supports 15 and patient support mounting devices 11 are manufactured in different shapes and sizes. Figs. 2a and 2b show non-limiting examples of patient supports 15. Each of the patient supports 15 has two sets of two loops 16, which may be formed from a flexible and tear-strong material. Preferably, there is a first set of two shoulder loops 16-1 and a second set of two feet loops 16-2. The distance 17 between the loops 16 of a patient support 15 may depend on the size range of the patient support 15. For example, the distance 17 between two loops 16 of a patient support 15 having size L is greater than the distance 17 between two loops 16 of a patient support 15 having size M. In the examples shown in Figs. 2a and 2b the distance 17-1 between the shoulder loops 16-1 of the patient support 15-1 is greater than the distance 17-2 between the shoulder loops 16-1 of the patient support 15-2.

Figs. 3a to 3d show non-limiting examples of patient support mounting devices

11. The patient support mounting device 11-1 shown in Fig. 3a comprises two straight bars 18. At each of the distal ends of the bars 18 a hook 19 with a latch 20 is attached. Further, the bars 18 are connected via a bar assembly 21. In contrast to the patient support mounting device 11-1 shown in Fig. 3a the patient support mounting device 11- 2 shown in Fig. 3b comprises one straight bar 18-1 and one curved bar 18-2. Figs. 3c and 3d show patient support mounting devices 11 having a single bar 18 only. The bar 18 of the patient support mounting device 11-4 shown in Fig. 3d is more massive than the bar 18 of the patient support mounting device 11-3 shown in Fig. 3c. Due to their different shapes and sizes not all of the patient supports 15 shown in Figs. 2a to 2b can be combined with all of the patient support mounting devices 11 shown in Figs. 3a to 3d and ensure safety for the patient during transfer.

In this regard Fig. 4 shows a non-limiting example of a method 40 for assessing compatibility of a patient support 15 with a patient support mounting device 11 of a patient handling system. The method 40 comprises determining 41 at least one property of the patient support mounting device 11. Further, the method 40 comprises assessing 42 the compatibility of the patient support 15 with the patient support mounting device 11 on the basis of the at least one determined property. In this way the compatibility may be efficiently assessed.

Determining 41 the at least one property of the patient support mounting device 11 may comprise measuring a dimension of the patient support mounting device 11 and/or a distance between two elements, e.g. the distance between two hooks 19, of the patient support mounting device 11, e.g. by a customer service person of a company selling patient support mounting devices 11 and/or patient supports 15, or an appropriately trained user or caregiver. For example, the customer service person measures the dimension and/or the distance using a measuring tape or using the assessment tool described below. Alternatively or additionally, determining 41 the at least one property of the patient support mounting device 11 may comprise optically and/or manually inspecting a surface of the patient support mounting device 11 by the customer service person.

Further, assessing 42 the compatibility of a patient support 15 with the patient support mounting device 11 on the basis of the at least one determined property may comprise comparing the at least one determined property of the patient support mounting device 11 to properties of the patient support 15. For example, the at least one determined property of the patient support mounting device 11 is a center-to-center distance between two hooks 19 of the patient support mounting device 11 and the properties of the patient support 15 are a maximal distance between the loops 16 of the patient support 15, e.g. when the loops 16 are bent outwards, and a minimal distance of the loops 16, e.g. when the loops 16 are bent inwards. In case said center-to-center distance lies within said minimal distance and said maximal distance the patient support 15 may be assessed compatible to the patient support mounting device 11 or vice versa.

The at least one determined property of the patient support mounting device 11 may be selected from the group of a dimension of a hook 19 of the patient support mounting device 11, a surface finish of a hook region of the patient support mounting device 11, a distance between two shoulder hooks of the patient support mounting device 11, and a distance between a shoulder hook and a foot hook or a feet hook of the patient support mounting device 11. In this way the property of the patient support mounting device 11 may be efficiently determined. Optionally, assessing 42 the compatibility may comprise determining if the at least one determined property lies within a size parameter range of the patient support 15. Patient supports 15 may be provided in different sizes, such as XXS, XS, S, M, L, XL, and/or XXL. Further, the size of a patient support 15 may limit, to ensure safe patient handling, the minimal allowed distance and the maximal allowed distance between the loops 16 of the patient support 15 during its use. Further, assessing 42 the compatibility may comprise determining if the distance between two hooks 19 of the patient support mounting device 11 lies between said minimal distance and said maximal distance. For example, if the size of the patient support is M, the minimal distance between the loops 16 may be 40cm and the maximal distance between the loops 16 may be 64cm. Consequently, in this example, it may be determined whether the distance between two hooks 19 of the patient support mounting device 11 lies between 40cm and 64cm, for assessing 42 the compatibility.

Optionally, the patient support 15 may be assessed compatible with the patient support mounting device 11, if the at least one determined property lies within the size parameter range of the patient support 15.

Optionally, the method 40 may comprise determining a plurality of properties of the patient support mounting device 11 and assessing the compatibility of the patient support 15 with the patient support mounting device 11 on the basis of the plurality of determined properties. Optionally, the patient support 15 may be assessed compatible with the patient support mounting device 11 if all determined properties of the patient mounting support device 11 are compatible with the patient support 15.

Optionally, assessing 42 the compatibility may comprise transposing the at least one determined property to an assessment form. The assessment form may be a paper document or an electronic document. Further, the at least one determined property may be transposed to the assessment form by a user, such as a customer service person.

Optionally, the method 40 may comprise attaching a label indicating the assessed compatibility to the patient support mounting device 11. In this way, the compatibility of the patient support mounting device 11 with specific patient supports 15 may be indicated efficiently. For example, the label indicates the sizes of compatible patient supports 15. Optionally, the patient support mounting device 11 may be selected from the group of a hanger bar, a spreader bar, a lifting bar, and a mounting block. Optionally, the patient support 15 may be selected from the group of a sling, a harness, and a basket.

Fig. 5 shows a non-limiting example of an arrangement 50 for assessing compatibility of a patient support 15 with a patent support mounting device 11 of a patient handling system. The arrangement 50 comprises a patient support mounting device 11 having two bars 18. The patient support mounting device 11 shown in Fig. 5 may be similar to the patient mounting device 11-2 discussed in connection with Fig.

3b. In the example shown in Fig. 5, bar 18-1 is a shoulder bar and bar 18-2 is a feet bar. At each of the distal ends of the bars 18 a hook 19 having a latch 20 is formed. The latch 20 may secure a loop 16 of a patient support 15 in the respective hook 19. Further, the arrangement 50 comprises two assessment tools 51.

The assessment tool 51 for assessing compatibility of a patient support 15 with a patient support mounting device 11 of a patient handling system comprises a band shaped body 52. At least one first marker element 55 is formed at a first surface 53 of the body 52. Further, the at least one first marker element 55 indicates an allowable extension range of the patient support 15 in a first direction when in use. Additionally, at least one second marker element 56 is formed at a second surface 54 of the body 52. The at least one second marker element 56 indicates an allowable extension range of the patient support 15 in a second direction when in use. For example, the allowable extension range of the patient support 15 in the first direction is the range of distances that may exist between the shoulder loops of the patient support 15 during safe use of the patient support 15. The allowable extension range of the patient support 15 in the second direction is preferably the range of distances that may exist between a shoulder loop and a feet loop of the patient support 15 during safe use of the patient support 15.

The respective marker elements 55, 56 may be printed on the respective surface 53, 54, glued to the respective surface 53, 54, and/or stamped into the respective surface 53, 54. In the example shown in Fig. 5, three first marker elements 55 and three second marker elements 56 are illustrated. As indicated by said Fig. 5, the first marker elements 55 and second marker elements 56 may each comprise a color indication, each being in a color xl-x6. Optionally, the body 52 may be flexible. For example, the body 52 is formed from a ribbon of cloth, plastic, and/or fiber glass or the body 52 is a flexible metal strip.

Optionally, the at least one first marker element 55 may indicate a first size parameter range of the patient support 15. The size parameter range may be the range between the minimal allowable distance and the maximal allowable distance of two loops 16 of a patient support 15 having a given size. Further, the size parameter range may be indicated in standard and/or bariatric sizes. Optionally, the at least one second marker element 56 may indicate a second size parameter range of the patient support 15. The size parameter range may be the range between the minimal allowable distance and the maximal allowable distance of two loops 16 of a patient support 15 having a given size. Further, the size parameter range may be indicated in standard and/or bariatric sizes. The size parameter ranges indicated by the respective marker elements 55, 56 may be size parameter ranges of a single manufacturer or of a plurality of

manufacturers.

Optionally, the assessment tool 51 may have at least one loop 57 at a distal end 60 of the body 52. The loop 57 may be similar to the loops 16 of the patient support 15.

The loop 57 being arranged to be connected to the patient support mounting device 11 to determine if the patient support 15 is compatible with the patient support mounting device 11. For example, the loop 57 is inserted into a hook 19 of the patient support mounting device 11 to determine if the loops 16 of the patient support 15 fit in the hooks 19 of the patient support mounting device 11.

Optionally, the at least one loop 57 may be fixed to the body 52 by a fixing member 58. For example, the fixing member 58 is a ring passed through openings of the body 52 and the loop 57. Optionally or additionally, a tag 59 may be fixed to the fixing member 58. Instructions for using the assessment tool 51 are printed on the tag 59, for example.

Optionally, the assessment tool 51 may have a plurality of loops 57 at the distal end 60 of the body 52. Each loop may be arranged to be connected to the patient support mounting device. For example, the assessment tool 51 has 2 to 10 loops 57, or 4 to 6 loops 57, or 5 loops 57. For example, the loops 57 are intended to be inserted into the hooks 19 of the patient support mounting device 11 for checking compatibility. By inserting a different number of loops 57 into the hooks 19 different sizes of loops 16 of patient supports 15 may be simulated. Optionally, the loops 57 may be riveted together. Accordingly, each loop may correspond to a patient support, e.g. each loop being configured to simulate a patient support.

The arrangement 50 may be used in a method for assessing compatibility of a patient support 15 with a patient support mounting device 11 of a patient handling system utilizing the assessment tool 51. The compatibility may be assessed according to method 40.

The compatibility may be assessed by inspecting the patient support mounting device 11 based on five criteria using the assessment tool 51. Alternatively or additionally, a measuring tape may be used for assessing the compatibility.

In a first step the dimensions of the hooks 19 may be inspected. For this purpose, the loop 57 or several loops 57 may be inserted into one hook 19 or each of the hooks 19. A first criterion A may be that the diameter 61 of the hooks 19 is large enough to insert the loop 57 or the loops 57 into the hooks 19. Additionally, a second criterion B may be that the hooks 19 are large enough such that the latch 20 can be moved as indicated by line 62 when the loop 57 is inserted or the loops 57 are inserted. In case the loop 57 or the loops 57 can be inserted into the hooks 19 without interfering the motion of the latches 20 criteria A and B are fulfilled. Otherwise, criteria A and B are not fulfilled. For example, criteria A and B relate to the dimension of the hooks 19, more specifically to the area that can be fitted within the confinement of the hook 19 without interfering with the opening or closing motion of the latch 20.

In a second step the surface finish of a hook region 63 of the hooks 19 may be inspected to ensure that the hook region 63 is free of sharp edges, nicks, burrs, scales or the like corresponding to criterion C. The hook region 63 may be inspected optically and/or manually by a user. Further, the hook regions 63 may be the sections of the surface of the hooks 19 onto which the loops 16 of the patient support 15 are attached.

In case the hook region 63 is free of sharp edges, nicks, burrs, scales or the like criterion C is fulfilled. Otherwise, criterion C is not fulfilled. For example, criterion C relates to the surface finish of the section of the surface onto which the loops 16 of the patient supports 15, such as slings, are attached.

In a third step criterion D, the distance, in particular the center-to-center distance, between the shoulder hooks 19-1, may be determined using the assessment tool 51-1. Alternatively or additionally, a measuring tape may be used to determine the distance. As shown in Fig. 5, the distance may be determined by holding end region 64 of the assessment tool 51-1 below the center of one of the shoulder hooks 19-1 as indicated by line 65, determining the position of the center of the other shoulder hook 19-1 on the assessment tool 51-1 as indicated by line 66, and reading, at the determined position, the distance value from a graduated scale on the assessment tool 51-1. The position of the center of the other shoulder hook 19-1 on the assessment tool 51-1 as indicated by line 66 may be compared with the first indicator elements 55 on the first surface 53. As indicated by line 66, the distance between the shoulder hooks 19-1 is within the size parameter range indicated by first marker element 55-3. For example, first marker element 55-3 indicates the size L. Thus, patient supports 15 having the size parameter range indicated by the first marker element 55-3, e.g. patient supports 15 having size L, fulfill criterion D. Patient supports 15 having different size parameter ranges, e.g.

patient supports 15 having size S, do not fulfill criterion D. For example, criterion D relates to the distance between the shoulder hooks 19-1. The shoulder hooks 19-1 may be the hooks to which the shoulder loops of the patient support 15 are attached.

In a fourth step, criterion E, the distance, in particular the center-to-center distance, between the shoulder hooks 19-1 and the foot hooks 19-2 or feet hooks, may be determined using the assessment tool 51-2. Alternatively or additionally, a measuring tape may be used to determine the distance. As shown in Fig. 5, the distance may be determined by holding end region 64 of the assessment tool 51-2 below the center of a shoulder hook 19-1 as indicated by line 65, determining the position of the center of the corresponding facing feet hook 19-2 on the assessment tool 51-2 as indicated by line 67, and reading, at the determined position, the distance value from a graduated scale on the assessment tool 51-2. The position of the center of the feet hook 19-2 on the assessment tool 51-2 as indicated by line 67 may be compared with the second indicator elements 56 on the second surface 54. As indicated by line 67, the distance between the shoulder hooks 19-1 and the foot hooks 19-2 is within the size parameter ranges indicated by all second marker element 56-1, 56-2, 56-3. For example, second marker elements 56-1, 56-2, 56-3 indicate the sizes M, L, XL. Thus, patient supports 15 having the size parameter ranges indicated by the second marker elements 56-1, 56-2, 56-3, e.g. patient supports 15 having size M, L, or XL, fulfdl criterion E. Patient supports 15 having different size parameter ranges e.g. patient supports 15 having size XXS, do not fulfdl criterion E. For example, criterion E relates to the distance between the shoulder hooks 19-1 and the feet hooks 19-2. This distance may be the distance between the sets of hooks 19 to which the shoulder loops and feet loops of the patient supports 15 are attached.

The results of the inspection of the patient support mounting device 11 may be transposed, e.g. by the customer service person, onto an assessment form, from which compatibility with specific patient support sizes can be established. Those then may become safe combinations. Those of skill in the art will appreciate that further criteria may be considered and that one or more of the criteria A to E may be omitted when assessing compatibility of the patient support 15 with the patient support mounting device 11.

Fig. 6 shows a non-limiting example of an excerpt of an assessment form 70. The assessment form 70 may be a paper document or an electronic document. Further, assessment form 70 comprises a plurality of sections 71 to 76, which may be filled out by a user. Section 71 relates to information regarding the manufacturer, part number and serial number of the patient support mounting device 11. Additionally, section 72 relates to a description and a maximum safe working load (SWL) of the patient support mounting device 11. In section 73 there is noted whether the patient support mounting device 11 fulfills all of criteria A, B and C or not. In the example shown in Fig. 6 the patient support mounting device 11 fulfills criteria A, B and C. Section 74 relates to criterion D and section 75 relates to criterion E. The checkboxes in sections 74 and 75 indicate which sizes of patient supports 15 are a safe match with the length and width, respectively of the patient support mounting device 11 being currently examined.

Additionally, section 76 summarizes the sizes of patient supports 15 where both criterion D and criterion E are met. As illustrated by box 77, in the present example, both criterion D and criterion E are met for patient supports 15 having the size M or L. From the assessment form 70 it can be concluded that patient supports 15 having the size M or L are compatible with the patient support mounting device 11 of the type indicated in section 71. Additionally, it can be concluded that patient supports 15 having a different size than M or L are not compatible with the patient support mounting device 11 of the type indicated in section 71. The assessment form 70 may comprise size indicators each comprising a color indication x7-xl6, as depicted in Fig. 6.

Once the compatibility is assessed and safe combinations are defined, the patient support mounting device 11 may be labelled with the proper sizes of patient supports 15 with which it is compatible. Fig. 7 illustrates a non-limiting arrangement for labelling a patient support mounting device 11. The arrangement comprises a label 80 and a further patient support mounting device 11-2. The label 80 for indicating compatibility of patient supports 15 with a patient support mounting device 11 of a patient handling system comprises a body 81. Further a plurality of indicators 82 is formed at the body 81. Each of the indicators 82 indicates a size parameter range of patient supports 15 compatible with the patient support mounting device 11. In the example shown in Fig.

7, the indicator 82-1 indicates size XXS, the indicator 82-2 indicates size XS, the indicator 82-3 indicates size S, the indicator 82-4 indicates size M, the indicator 82-5 indicates size L, the indicator 82-6 indicates size LL, the indicator 82-7 indicates size XL, and the indicator 82-8 indicates size XXL. For example, the indicators 82 are printed on the body 81 and/or stamped into the body 81. For example, the body 81 may comprise a top layer, in or on which the indicators 82 are formed, and a glue layer arranged at the top layer. Optionally, the body 81 may further comprise a protective layer. The glue layer may be arranged between the protective layer and the top layer. Further, the protective layer may be removed from the glue layer prior to attaching the label 80 to a patient support mounting device 11. For example, the top layer is formed from paper, plastic, vinyl or the like. The protective layer is formed from paper, plastic, vinyl or the like, for example. For example, the glue layer comprises a pressure- sensitive adhesive (PSA) material, a self-adhesive material and/or a self-stick adhesive material such as acrylate polymer, rubber or the like. As identified in the assessment form 70, sizes M and L are compatible with the patient support mounting device 11. The corresponding indicators 82-4 and 82-5 may be separated from, e.g. peeled of, the label 81 and attached, e.g. glued, to the patient support mounting device 11-2 as indicated by box 83 and arrow 84.

Optionally, the indicators 82 may be individually separable. In this way, the indicators 82 may be efficiently separated from the rest of the label 80. Optionally, the indicators 82 may be arranged in series. Optionally, the label 80 may be an adhesive label. In this way, the indicators 82 or the label 80 may be efficiently attached to the patient support mounting device 11. The labelling process described above may form a method for indicating compatibility of patient supports 15 with a patient support mounting device 11 of a patient handling system utilizing the label 80. The indicators 82 may each comprise a color indication xl7-x26.

According to an embodiment, the process described in connection with Figs. 5 to 7 may be a compatibility process for patient support mounting devices 11 that does not include extensive validation activities of each possible patient support size - patient support mounting device 11 combination. It may rely on existing validation that was performed by a patient support manufacturer defining which patient support sizes are compatible with which patient support mounting device dimensions. This process may allow non-bias evaluation of a patient support mounting device 11 based on pre-defmed criteria making the process safer for the caregiver and the patient who use the equipment.

According to a further embodiment, the process described in connection with Figs. 5 to 7 may be a process that includes labelling a patient support mounting device 11 to indicate which manufacturers patient support sizes are compatible with it.

Figs. 8a and 8b show a non-limiting example of another assessment form 70. Fig.

8a shows the first page of the assessment form 70 while Fig. 8b shows the second page or any further page of the assessment form 70. The first page of the assessment form 70 has a section 91 relating to general information relating to a user assessing the compatibility. Additionally, the first page has a section 92 relating to instructions of use for performing the method 40 including the assessment criteria. The assessment criteria may comprise color indications x27-x54, the indications may be arranged in rows. Further, the first page has signing sections 93, 94 for a user assessing the compatibility and a customer, e.g. the owner of the person support mounting device 11. The second page of the assessment form 70 shown in Fig. 8b has a plurality of sections 95 for assessing compatibility of patient supports 15 with several patient support mounting devices 11. Section 95-1 corresponds to the example discussed in connection with Fig.

6. Further, section 95-2 shows an example for assessing a patient support mounting device 11 not having a feet bar 18-2. In this case there is no need to check criterion E for assessing compatibility. The second page may comprise size indicators, each comprising a color indication x48-x57.

Figs. 9a and 9b show a non-limiting example of another assessment tool 51. On the first surface 53 of the body 52 of the assessment tool 51 a plurality of first marker elements 55 is formed while on the second surface 54 of the body 52 of the assessment tool 51 a plurality of second marker elements 56 is formed. The first and second marker elements may comprise color indications x58-x67. The first and second marker elements may be arranged in rows. The assessment tool 51 further has a tag 59 comprising instructions of use. Additionally, five loops 57 are fixed to a distal end 60 of the body 52. As shown in Fig. 9b, the loops 57 are riveted together by a rivet 96.

Fig. 10 shows a non-limiting example of another process 100 for assessing compatibility. The process 100 may be performed similar to the method 40. Further, the process 100 may be performed utilizing the assessment form 70 discussed in connection with Figs. 8a and 8b and the assessment tool 51 discussed in connection with Fig 9a and 9b and/or the assessment tool 51-1 or 51-2 discussed in connection with Fig. 5. In step 101 the user gathers client information. Further, in step 102 the user fills out section 91 of assessment form 70 using the gathered client information. In the following step 103 the user reads the assessment criteria or the instructions of use listed in section 92 of the assessment form 70. Information regarding the patient support mounting devices 11, e.g. spreader bars or hanger bars, to be assessed is listed by the user in step 104 and inserted into subsections 71 and 72 of sections 95 of the assessment form 70 in step 105. In step 106 the assessment tool 51 is used to measure each of the patient support mounting devices 11 against criteria A, B, C, D, and E. The measurement results are added to subsections 73, 74 and 75 of sections 95 of the assessment form 70 in step 107. In step 108 it is determined if each of the patient support mounting devices 11 is compatible. In case a patient support mounting device 11 is not compatible, the customer is informed in step 109. In case patient support mounting devices 11 are

assessed compatible, for each of the compatible patient support mounting devices 11 compatible patient support sizes, e.g. sling sizes, are defined in step 110. In step 111 the assessed compatibility is noted for each patient support mounting device 11 in subsection 76 of corresponding section 95 of assessment form 70 by the user. The evaluated results are reviewed with the customer in step 112. In step 113 it is checked, if the customer accepts the result. In case the customer does not accept the result, the process is aborted in step 114. In case the customer accepts the result the customer signs the assessment form 70, e.g. in section 94 of the assessment form 70, in step 115. In step 116 further section 93 and/or 94 of the assessment form 70 relating to an acknowledgement section is filled out. Each of the person support mounting devices 11 assessed compatible and accepted by the customer is labeled utilizing the label 80 in step 117.

According to an embodiment the user may start to gather information on specific patient support mounting devices 11 and fill one line of the assessment form 70 for each patient support mounting device in process 100. Each patient support mounting device 11 may be evaluated against each criterion. Depending on the results, the conclusion can be that the patient support mounting device 11 is not compatible with certain patient support sizes or that the patient support mounting device 11 is compatible with certain patient support sizes.

Some embodiments relate to a sling-spreader bar compatibility assessment process.

In some embodiments a process may define compatibility of a given patient support 15 with a specific patient support mounting device 11. The process may allow a user to objectively assess if a patient support 15 by a given manufacturer, more specifically, if a given patient support size is compatible with any specific patient support mounting device 11. This assessment may be based on five criteria, e.g. criteria A to E, and may be done using the assessment form 70 and the assessment tool 51. If the patient support mounting device 11 is found compatible with certain patient support sizes, it may than be labelled with those sizes so that the caregiver knows which patient support sizes are compatible with the patent support mounting device 11 by looking at the label 80.

In some embodiments a manufacturer may validate, which of its patient supports 15 are compatible with which of its patient support mounting devices 11, to identify working combinations of patient supports 15 and patient support mounting devices 11.

In some embodiments, when caregivers want to use patient supports 15 and patient support mounting devices 11 from different manufacturers, there may be no information available identifying if the combination they want to use is safe. The caregiver may then be responsible for assessing the combination and, in the case of an incident involving a non-validated sling-hanger bar combination, manufacturers cannot be held responsible because their products were used against their advice. This situation may prevent healthcare institutions from purchasing patient handling system components from different manufacturers or put patients at risk of being transferred in an unsafe patient support - patient support mounting device combination.

Those of skill in the art will appreciate that embodiments not expressly illustrated herein may be practiced within the scope of the claims, including that features described herein for different embodiments may be combined with each other and/or with currently -known or future-developed technologies while remaining within the scope of the claims. Those of skill in the art will also be enabled to practice various other embodiments of concepts for assessing and/or identifying compatible patient support and patient support mounting devices combinations from the embodiments disclosed herein. Although specific terms are employed herein, they are used in a generic and descriptive sense only and not for purposes of limitation. It is therefore intended that the foregoing detailed description be regarded as illustrative rather than limiting. And, it should be understood that the following claims, including all equivalents, are intended to define the spirit and scope of this invention. Furthermore, the advantages described above are not necessarily the only advantages of the invention, and it is not necessarily expected that all of the described advantages will be achieved with every embodiment.

Claims

1. A method for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system, the method comprising:

determining at least one property of the patient support mounting device;

and

assessing the compatibility of the patient support with the patient support mounting device on basis of the at least one determined property.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the at least one property comprises measuring a dimension of the patient support mounting device and/or optically and/or manually inspecting a surface of the patient support mounting device.

3. The method claim 1 or 2, wherein assessing the compatibility of a patient support with the patient support mounting device on the bases of the at least one determined property comprises comparing the at least one determined property of the patient support mounting device to properties of the patient support.

4. The method of any one of the preceding claims, wherein the at least one determined property of the patient support mounting device is selected from the group of a dimension of a hook of the patient support mounting device, a surface finish of a hook region of the patient support mounting device, a distance between two shoulder hooks of the patient support mounting device, and a distance between a shoulder hook and a foot hook of the patient support mounting device.

5. The method of any one of the preceding claims, wherein assessing the compatibility comprises determining if the at least one determined property lies within a size parameter range of the patient support.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein the patient support is assessed compatible with the patient support mounting device, if the at least one determined property lies within the size parameter range of the patient support.

7. The method of any one of the preceding claims, comprising determining a plurality of properties of the patient support mounting device, and assessing the compatibility of the patient support with the patient support mounting device on basis of the plurality of determined properties.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein the patient support is assessed compatible with the patient support mounting device, if all determined properties of the patient support mounting device are compatible with the patient support.

9. The method of any one of the preceding claims, wherein assessing the compatibility comprises transposing the at least one determined property to an assessment form.

10. The method of any one of the preceding claims, further comprising attaching a label indicating the assessed compatibility to the patient support mounting device.

11. The method of any one of the preceding claims, wherein the patient support mounting device is selected from the group of a hanger bar, a spreader bar, a lifting bar, and a mounting block.

12. The method of any one of the preceding claims, wherein the patient support is selected from the group of a sling, a harness, and a basket.

13. An assessment tool for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system, the assessment tool comprising: a band shaped body;

at least one first marker element formed at a first surface of the body, the at least one first marker element indicating a size parameter range of the patient support in a first direction; and

at least one second marker element formed at a second surface of the body, the at least one second marker element indicating a size parameter range of the patient support in a second direction.

14. The assessment tool of claim 13, wherein the at least one first marker element indicates an allowable extension range of the patient support in the first direction when in use and the at least one second marker element indicates an allowable extension range of the patient support in a second direction when in use.

15. The assessment tool of claim 13 or 14, further having at least one loop at a distal end of the body.

16. The assessment tool of claim 15, wherein the at least one loop is fixed to the body by a fixing member.

17. The assessment tool of any one of claim 14 to 16, having a plurality of loops at the distal end of the body.

18. The assessment tool of claim 17, wherein the loops are riveted together.

19. A method for assessing compatibility of a patient support with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system utilizing the assessment tool of any one of claim 13 to 18.

20. A label for indicating compatibility of patient supports with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system, the label comprising:

a body; and at least one indicator formed at the body;

wherein each of the indicators indicates a size parameter range of patient

supports compatible with the patient support mounting device.

21. A method for indicating compatibility of patient supports with a patient support mounting device of a patient handling system utilizing the label of claim 20.