Draft Meeting Minutes 1

Medical Diagnostic Equipment Accessibility Standards 

Advisory Committee

Minutes

December 3 and 4, 2012 

U.S. Access Board, Washington, DC

MEMBERS PRESENT:_________________________________________________________

Carol J. Bradley, Sutter Health Jack DeBraal, Brewer Company

Kat Taylor, Equal Rights Center Renee Kielich, Hill-Rom Company, Inc.

Kleo J. King, United Spinal Association Rochelle J. Mendonca, Univ. Sciences Phila

Dennis Hancher, VA JB Risk, MPI (via teleconference)

Molly Follette Story, FDA June Isaacson Kailes, HFCDHP & DREDF

Elisabeth George, Philips Healthcare Zita Johnson-Betts, DOJ

Jeffery Baker, MTI Mary Ann Spohrer (via teleconference)

Lisa Iezzoni, Boston CIL (Chair) David Hausmann, Hausmann Industries

Mark E. Derry, NCIL (via teleconference) Tamara James, Duke Univ. & Medical Ctr.

Hans Beinke, Siemens Medical Solutions Maureen Simonson, PVA

Kaylan M. Dunlap, Evan Terry Associates Joseph Drago, Scale-Tronix, Inc.

Don Brandon, ADA National Network (via teleconference)

ALTERNATES PRESENT:______________________________________________________

Austin Schreiber, Stryker Medical

Janice Carroll, Sutter Health

Richard M. Eaton, MITA

Steven Kachelmeyer, GE Healthcare

Glenn Nygard, Hologic, Inc.

Bob Menke, Midmark Corporation

Kristen Barry, Equal Rights Center

Sarah DeCosse, DOJ

ACCESS BOARD STAFF PRESENT:_____________________________________________

Rose Bunales Rex Pace (Committee DFO)

David Capozzi James Raggio

Marsha Mazz Earlene Sesker

OTHERS PRESENT:__ _____________________________________________________

Dennis Monty, Beth Israel Deaconess Med. Ctr. W.E. Martin, Martin Innovations

Brian Helms, US Army HFPA Myra Martin, Martin Innovations

Ed Steinfeld, UB IDEA Denise Garcia, INOVA Health System

Michelle Lustrino, Hologic, Inc. Gloria Romanelli, Amer. Coll. Radiology

Jim Scott, Applied Policy Mary Adams, DOJ

Jonathan Young, Midmark Janice Majewski, DOJ

Vienalyn Tankiamco Maria Caudill

Paul Farber Jim Bostrom, DOJ
Draft Meeting Minutes 2

Opening Remarks and Approval of Minutes

The Committee Chair, Lisa Iezzoni, opened the meeting. The committee approved the minutes 

from its September meeting and did a roll call.

Transfer Surface Size: Presentations and Discussion

The Brewer Company, Midmark Corporation, and Martin Innovations exhibited exam tables and 

chairs in the meeting room. Rex Pace gave a PowerPoint presentation reviewing the proposed 

requirements for the size of the transfer surface. He provided information regarding background 

materials consulted for the proposed dimensions including: comments received from the 

Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) in response to the U.S. Department of 

Justice Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on equipment and furniture; the dimensions for 

rectangular seats in roll-in showers from the 2004 ADA and ABA Accessibility Guidelines; and

the ideal chair width recommended in Architectural Graphic Standards for auditorium seating. 

The committee also reviewed anthropometric data from a variety of sources. 

Dr. Edward Steinfeld, Director of the Center of Inclusive Design and Environmental Access at 

the University of Buffalo, gave a presentation on the Wheeled Mobility Anthropometry Project. 

He provided a brief analysis of measurements of individuals using wheeled mobility devices he 

considered relevant for establishing the width and depth of seating surfaces for wheeled mobility

device users. Dr. Steinfeld’s data was obtained from subjects seated in their mobility devices, 

not while transferring from one surface to another. Very little data specific to dimensions for 

transfer surfaces is available to the committee. Nonetheless, the results of the Wheeled 

Anthropometry project indicated that a seating surface can have a width of 28 inches and 

accommodate the 95th percentile of the population of wheeled mobility device users studied. Dr. 

Steinfeld reported that his research data suggested that a depth of 15 inches would provide an 

adequate seating surface for the average user in his sample. 

Based on the Dr. Steinfeld’s presentation and the dimensions included in the proposed rule, the 

discussion focused on 28 inches versus 30 inches minimum width. The committee decided that 

additional information from practitioners is necessary before consensus can be achieved on the 

width of the exam table transfer surface. The committee also discussed the proposed 15 inch 

minimum depth. Committee members raised concerns that the proposed depth is too short; they

agreed that a 17inch minimum depth would be more appropriate.

Committee members discussed whether the committee should take into consideration the needs 

of individuals who are obese in determining the size and capacity of the transfer surface. Several 

committee members felt uncomfortable with the word “bariatric” because it presupposes 

therapeutic choices of persons who are obese. Furthermore, obese individuals require diagnostic 

services for conditions beyond their obesity. Committee members also noted the need to define 

“obese,” and suggested relying on definitions used by federal agencies, such as the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention. The members decided, although morbidly obese persons can be 

people with disabilities, this is a special population with very specific requirements which may

not be appropriate for the majority of people with disabilities.
Draft Meeting Minutes 3

Permitted Obstructions: Presentation and Discussion

Rex Pace gave a PowerPoint presentation outlining the proposed requirement that the transfer 

surface have two unobstructed sides. Mr. Pace focused on the question in the proposed rule 

about permitting equipment parts located below the transfer surface to extend outward 

horizontally for 3 inches maximum. Mr. Pace presented an overview of relevant information 

form “The Impact of Transfer Setup on the Performance of Independent Wheelchair Transfers”,

a study by the University of Pittsburgh and sponsored by the Access Board. The data indicated 

that a horizontal gap between the wheelchair seat and the transfer surface is more tolerable when 

the seating surfaces are aligned vertically. Although some committee members expressed 

concerns that the sample was not representative of the population of individuals with disabilities,

the committee determined that the 3 inch horizontal gap between the wheelchair seat and the 

transfer surface in the proposed rule is acceptable provided that the transfer surface height is 

adjustable allowing the wheelchair seat to be vertically aligned with the transfer surface. The 

discussion then moved to equipment that is adjustable and possible low height requirements and 

associated limitations of the equipment in providing lower heights. As with the width issue, 

committee members did not reach consensus regarding an appropriate low height for a transfer 

surface. They suggested that input from experienced clinicians could assist decision-making. 

The committee agreed that the availability and configuration of transfer supports needs to be 

addressed in more detail and in conjunction with the transfer surface requirements. 

Subcommittees

Six subcommittees were proposed at the last meeting: (1) exam chairs and tables; (2) stretchers 

and beds; (3) mammography; (4) imaging equipment with bores; (5) other imaging equipment; 

and (6) weight scales. After a discussion, the committee decided to proceed with the 

subcommittees on mammography and weight scale equipment. Formation of other 

subcommittees was put on hold pending presentations by health care practitioners and imaging 

equipment experts at the next committee meeting in January 2013.

Committee members volunteered for the subcommittees on mammography and weight scales. 

Mammography subcommittee members are Mary Anne Spohrer, June Kailes, Maureen 

Simonson and Carol Bradley. Weight Scale subcommittee members are June Kailes, Kleo King, 

James Drago, John Wells, Kaylan Dunlap, Kat Taylor and Bob Menke. The plan is to notify all 

committee members about subcommittee meetings, which will be held by teleconference, so 

anyone can join the discussion.

 

Public Comment December 3, 2012

Dennis Monty from the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston reported that his 

institution formed a patient advisory group with members representing the disability community. 

Mr. Monty also stated that he researched information on the typical old exam table and found the 

width to be 26.5 inches; thus any improvement on that dimension is welcome. Gloria Romanelli 

from the American College of Radiology suggested that clinician and manufacture presentations 

be to the entire committee not just subcommittees. Dr. Willis Martin described his practice 

experiences and why he designed the exam table and chair on display throughout the meeting. 

Janice Carroll from Sutter Health stated that they have a value management team that provides 

input when acquiring equipment. At the end of this process, which included input from 
Draft Meeting Minutes 4

caregivers, patients and clinicians they decided, on tables adjustable within a range of 17 inches 

to 19 inches in height and that are 28 inches wide. They also suggested that exam tables and 

weight scales should have a 400 lb. weight capacity. Additionally, Ms. Carroll voiced concerns 

for the ergonomic impact on caregivers should the committee recommend a 30 inch wide exam 

table She also noted that space limitations could preclude the use of wider exam tables.

Public Comment December 4, 2012

Dennis Monty from the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston voiced concerns if the 

recommendations result in ramps to equipment. Dr. Willis Martin thanked the committee for the

opportunity to show his equipment and stated that although he owns a very small company he 

will support whatever the committee decides. Brad Baker from MTI (Medical Technology

Industries) addressed concerns about a table width of 30 inches minimum and a transfer height of 

18 inches. Paul Farber expressed concerns that a requirement for adjustability may prohibit any 

incremental manual adjustment.

Future Meetings

The committee discussed changing the dates for the next meeting, scheduled for the day after

inauguration, because of travel and lodging costs and availability. The committee was given to 

the end of the week to make travel arrangements and notify Rex Pace or Earlene Sesker of any

problems.

Wrap Up and Adjournment

The Chair reminded the committee members to make their reservation for the next meeting as 

soon as possible. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 2:30.