# Stryker chair 6252 stair pro Accidents?



## Marie lamb (Sep 7, 2017)

Hi I was wondering how people get on with the Stryker chair 6252 stair-pro tracked?
As an emt I have used these chairs for around 10 years. Back in 2016 I was using the Stryker chair with a, estimated 16-18 stone, Patient when the chair went over the 1st stair fine, then just took off getting faster and faster. 
I was foot end operator and because the chair was running down the stairs at an alarming rate, was having to run down the stairs backwards and as I couldn't keep up,  My left  ankle went over followed by my right ankle!!
I ended up falling down the rest of the stairs backwards. I was left with a compound tri-malleolus fracture with dislocation. 
My left ankle was badly sprained Also. 
So, like I say, has anyone else found that these chairs are "run away" and "lethal"?? 
Your opinions and experiences would be good to hear. Thanks in advance.


----------



## Bullets (Sep 8, 2017)

The rate of descent is controlled buy the person at the head. If it was moving fast it meant the person up top was letting it go fast. 

I have used one for 8 years and never had an issue


----------



## Marie lamb (Sep 8, 2017)

Bullets said:


> The rate of descent is controlled buy the person at the head. If it was moving fast it meant the person up top was letting it go fast.
> 
> I have used one for 8 years and never had an issue


The chair was tested and was at the top end of tolerance. There has been internal and external investigations to say that if this is the case with the tolerance then it does have the potential to runaway. There have also been insidences where tracks have come off half way down the stairs. 
There was an accident a few years before mine where there was a run away chair and that too was at tolerance. The company that I work for knew that there was a chance of a runaway chair at the top end of tolerance but didn't warn staff that this is the case!! 
This was all in my company alone. So just wondered whether anyone else has had similar incidents.


----------



## GMCmedic (Sep 8, 2017)

I dont understand how a stair chair just runs away when 2 people are holding it. 

I also think you dont really understand how a stair chair works. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk


----------



## Marie lamb (Sep 8, 2017)

GMCmedic said:


> I dont understand how a stair chair just runs away when 2 people are holding it.
> 
> I also think you dont really understand how a stair chair works.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk


I know exactly how the Stryker chair works thank you. I've had a whole year of sitting in on meetings with the health and safety executives and Stryker. I can tell you what the ranges of tolerance are, how often they are meant to be serviced,  what grit sandpaper you rub the tracks down with, down to what temperature you wash the damn thing down at. So please don't tell me I don't know how the chair works cause I know more than I really should (unfortunately, yawn) 
My question, again, was not how it works and whether I know how it works as clearly stated....it was ....has anyone else had any accidents with this chair?? ‍♀️


----------



## Jim37F (Sep 8, 2017)

I've always been taught that the tracks are only there to help the chair roll smoothly (actually only "more smoothly" than without the tracks) over the steps.

The tracks are not there to support the weight themselves. That's entirely on you and your partner, you have to support the patients weight and control the operation. Just like if you're using a stair chair without tracks.

The scenario you described sounds more like your partner screwed you, they failed to support their share of the patients weight, which then came diwn on top of you and you got ran over. That's operator error, not mechanical error. 

Unless the manufacturer explicitly states the stair chair is supposed to control the operation (Which not even those that make power tracked versions state), sounds more like there's an agency wide severe misunderstanding of the product and it's safe operation. Sounds like some agency wide retraining is in order before more people get hurt.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Sep 8, 2017)

Short answer is: no I have never had an issue or even heard of any of my coworkers having an issue. 

Long answer is: no I have not had any issues.


----------



## E tank (Sep 8, 2017)

Marie lamb said:


> The chair was tested and was at the top end of tolerance.



What does this mean? Tolerance for what?


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Sep 8, 2017)

E tank said:


> What does this mean? Tolerance for what?


I’m assuming weight?


----------



## E tank (Sep 8, 2017)

DesertMedic66 said:


> I’m assuming weight?



What is confusing is the statement about the chair being "tested". Every piece of weight bearing equipment is "tested" and rated for maximum limits by the manufacturer. I comes with the paper work if not on a sticker on the device/equipment. Knowing that is part of routine operation. I took the post to imply that  there was some post event testing.


----------



## Inspir (Sep 24, 2017)

Sounds like who ever was at the head end dropped the ball. Person at the head controls the rate of decent, while the person at the feet supports the weight. I've never had an accident. Albeit we use Ferno's and not Strykers.


----------



## DrParasite (Sep 24, 2017)

Marie lamb said:


> So, like I say, has anyone else found that these chairs are "run away" and "lethal"??
> Your opinions and experiences would be good to hear. Thanks in advance.


Never had any experiences like that; in fact, the stairchairs are much more stable and safe than older styles without the treads.  You should never have a "run away" stairchair unless the person at the head is unable to support the person's weight.

If anything, if the stairchair does "get away from you" when you are coming down the stairs, the smart thing to do is to STOP MOVING DOWN THE STAIRS.  Yes, you can do that even from the foot position if needed.

If you are running down the stairs, backwards, then it sounds like neither you nor the person at the head was performing as the manufacturer directed you to.

Based on my experience (almost 19 years in EMS, using the Stryker chair 6252 since 2006ish), and the situation you describe, it sounds like it was more operator error than mechanical failure.  If the tread fell off the track (which I haven't heard about but I can see that happening because they are rubber), or if the the chair broke of physically came apart while you were carrying the person, that would be a mechanical failure.  That doesn't appear to be the case, so based on how you describe the situation it seems to be a operator error.


Marie lamb said:


> The chair was tested and was at the top end of tolerance. There has been internal and external investigations to say that if this is the case with the tolerance then it does have the potential to runaway. There have also been insidences where tracks have come off half way down the stairs.
> There was an accident a few years before mine where there was a run away chair and that too was at tolerance. The company that I work for knew that there was a chance of a runaway chair at the top end of tolerance but didn't warn staff that this is the case!!
> This was all in my company alone. So just wondered whether anyone else has had similar incidents.


What do you mean by "The chair was tested and was at the top end of tolerance"?  So it was tested and found to be functioning within the manufacturer's specified range right?  It doesn't really matter where in the range it is, provided it is within the range.  If It was not functioning within the appropriate range, than I would think the manufacturer would recommend getting the chairs serviced or replaced (or at least taken out of service) until they were within the proper range.

While i am very sorry to hear that you were hurt, it sounds like you are looking for additional stories about this supposed failure in order to gain additional support for a lawsuit (either against the manufacturer or for a workman's comp case).


----------



## Tigger (Sep 24, 2017)

Jim37F said:


> I've always been taught that the tracks are only there to help the chair roll smoothly (actually only "more smoothly" than without the tracks) over the steps.
> 
> The tracks are not there to support the weight themselves. That's entirely on you and your partner, you have to support the patients weight and control the operation. Just like if you're using a stair chair without tracks.
> 
> ...


If you put more weight on the tracks it generates braking force. You should not be carrying the weight of the patient and chair.


----------



## Marie lamb (Sep 25, 2017)

DrParasite said:


> Never had any experiences like that; in fact, the stairchairs are much more stable and safe than older styles without the treads.  You should never have a "run away" stairchair unless the person at the head is unable to support the person's weight.
> 
> If anything, if the stairchair does "get away from you" when you are coming down the stairs, the smart thing to do is to STOP MOVING DOWN THE STAIRS.  Yes, you can do that even from the foot position if needed.
> 
> ...





Tigger said:


> If you put more weight on the tracks it generates braking force. You should not be carrying the weight of the patient and chair.


thank you. This is what I've been saying. The tracks should take the weight, that's the whole point of the chair.  The tracks play a massive part in the chairs performance and this includes the sanding of the underneath of the tracks which helps create friction. Our chair did not have the friction needed due to not being sand papered and the tracks being at the top end of tolerance (tolerance is the measurement of how tight the tracks are & should be no more than 2 inches when pulled away from the frame; before anyone asks the question again). This wasn't user error and it boils down to the maintenance and up keep of the chair, which was not carried out properly by the employer.


----------



## MonkeyArrow (Sep 25, 2017)

Marie lamb said:


> thank you. This is what I've been saying. The tracks should take the weight, that's the whole point of the chair.  The tracks play a massive part in the chairs performance and this includes the sanding of the underneath of the tracks which helps create friction. Our chair did not have the friction needed due to not being sand papered and the tracks being at the top end of tolerance (tolerance is the measurement of how tight the tracks are & should be no more than 2 inches when pulled away from the frame; before anyone asks the question again). This wasn't user error and it boils down to the maintenance and up keep of the chair, which was not carried out properly by the employer.


I still don't think you are understanding this. If the chair was at the top end of "tolerance", then that means it is within acceptable manufacturer specified ranges. The chair does not have a mechanical problem.


----------



## Marie lamb (Sep 25, 2017)

MonkeyArrow said:


> I still don't think you are understanding this. If the chair was at the top end of "tolerance", then that means it is within acceptable manufacturer specified ranges. The chair does not have a mechanical problem.


Yes correct but the THE TRACKS WERENT SAND PAPERED SO THERE FOR HAD REDUCED FRICTION, THERE FOR GOES FASTER!!  how many times do I have to explain this. Dig out a manual and then you'll know how the chair works!! Man this is hard work. I give up. It's now been proven to be mechanical failure due to poor maintenance so not user error!!  ‍♀️


----------



## GMCmedic (Sep 25, 2017)

Marie lamb said:


> Yes correct but the THE TRACKS WERENT SAND PAPERED SO THERE FOR HAD REDUCED FRICTION, THERE FOR GOES FASTER!!  how many times do I have to explain this. Dig out a manual and then you'll know how the chair works!! Man this is hard work. I give up. It's now been proven to be mechanical failure due to poor maintenance so not user error!!  ‍♀️


AGAIN. The individuals above and below the chair control the decent!!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk


----------



## luke_31 (Sep 25, 2017)

I think I figured this out. This person had a injury while using the stair chair and has been looking for others who have had problems with the stair chair. Finding none they have blamed all of us for not understanding and not knowing how to use a stair chair. Having to sand the tracks on the stair chair is a cop out from the manufacturer to blame the company that purchased it and then had a problem. If the stair chair is within the tolerance specs, then it's usable with the proper training, and ability to use it correctly. Just because it had the tracks doesn't mean that you still don't have to be able to carry the weight of it and the patient, it just allows you to be able to have some of the weight resting on the stairs. The star chair still needs you to control it or it will fall down the stairs. When I was practicing with these stair chairs at one company I worked at, the only time we could come close to what you are describing was by not holding the weight of the patient at the head or feet and just keeping the tracks in contact with the stairs. That would cause it to come barreling down. Bottom line is what you described as user error, sucks you got hurt, but it's ultimately you and your partner's fault.


----------



## epipusher (Sep 27, 2017)

Did I miss it or has the op not mentioned what the person at the head of the chair was doing?


----------



## E tank (Sep 27, 2017)

Marie lamb said:


> Yes correct but the THE TRACKS WERENT SAND PAPERED SO THERE FOR HAD REDUCED FRICTION, THERE FOR GOES FASTER!!  how many times do I have to explain this. Dig out a manual and then you'll know how the chair works!! Man this is hard work. I give up. It's now been proven to be mechanical failure due to poor maintenance so not user error!!  ‍♀️




https://www.manualslib.com/manual/1210234/Stryker-Stair-Pro-6250.html?page=40#manual

If you look at the maintenance schedule for the chair, the sand papering of the tracks is for sluggish operation, not inordinate non-resistance  to movement. Sand paper makes the chair move with less resistance, not more.


----------



## DrParasite (Sep 28, 2017)

Marie lamb said:


> I know exactly how the Stryker chair works thank you. I've had a whole year of sitting in on meetings with the health and safety executives and Stryker. I can tell you what the ranges of tolerance are, how often they are meant to be serviced,  what grit sandpaper you rub the tracks down with, down to what temperature you wash the damn thing down at. So please don't tell me I don't know how the chair works cause I know more than I really should (unfortunately, yawn)


So after all these meetings, you have become an expert in the stryker stair chair operations.


Marie lamb said:


> Our chair did not have the friction needed due to not being sand papered and the tracks being at the top end of tolerance (tolerance is the measurement of how tight the tracks are & should be no more than 2 inches when pulled away from the frame; before anyone asks the question again). This wasn't user error and it boils down to the maintenance and up keep of the chair, which was not carried out properly by the employer.


That's an interesting statement that you, as an expert, is describing as the tolerance levels.... Because the user manual says as follows: 





> To check the tension, pull up on the center of the belt until it is taut. The gap between the belt and the track frameshould measure between *3/8" and 1*".


  that's page 39 of the user manual, between steps 9 and 10 https://www.manualslib.com/manual/1210234/Stryker-Stair-Pro-6250.html?page=39#manual

oh, and in case you were wondering what the purpose of sanding the belts:





> Using a sanding block with 50 Grit sandpaper, sand both wear surfaces on the outside edges of each belt.  The purpose is to roughen the surface of the belt just enough to remove the shiny spotscaused by normal wear. Do not over sand the belts


 that's on page 41.

Based on this new information, I will be standing by my original assessment of your situation.  Sorry you got hurt, but it looks like user error on your part and you are looking for someone else to blame.


----------

