Patient Support Bed Tilt Frame for Sit-to-Stand Transfer

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing hospital beds lack the ability to efficiently transition patients from a lying position to a sitting or standing position, limiting patient mobility and accessibility.

Innovation Solution

A hospital bed with a tilt and stand capability, featuring a separately moveable head, seat, and foot sections, a rotatable tilt frame, and a footboard assembly that allows the bed to transition into a chair orientation or a standing position, along with actuators for independent section control and safety features like a CPR release and sensor-activated movement stops.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If a hospital bed is designed with traditional fixed structure, then manufacturing is simple and cost is low, but patient mobility and accessibility are limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepatient mobilityVSAvoidbed structure
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The bed is divided into multiple independently controllable sections (head section, seat section, foot section) that can be positioned separately. This segmentation allows the bed to adapt to different patient positions and mobility needs while maintaining a manageable structural complexity through modular design.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The bed incorporates dynamic positioning capabilities with actuators that enable each section to move between horizontal and vertical positions. This dynamic behavior allows the bed to transition between different configurations (lying, sitting, standing) to enhance patient mobility while the controlled actuation system keeps the overall device complexity manageable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Adaptability or versatility

If actuators are added to enable independent section control, then patient positioning flexibility is improved, but device complexity and cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesection positioning flexibilityVSAvoidactuator system
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The actuator system is segmented with individual actuators assigned to specific sections (head actuator, seat actuator, foot actuator). This segmentation allows each actuator to control only its designated section, simplifying the control logic and reducing the overall system complexity compared to a single complex actuation mechanism.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The actuators are designed with multi-functionality, enabling each actuator to perform multiple operations (raising, lowering, positioning) on its designated section. This universality reduces the total number of actuators needed, thereby reducing device complexity while maintaining positioning flexibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Adaptability or versatility

If the bed is designed to transition to standing position, then patient accessibility is improved, but safety risks during transition increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepatient accessibilityVSAvoidtransition safety
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The bed system performs preliminary actions by automatically positioning intermediate sections (seat section, foot section) to appropriate angles before the final standing transition. This preparatory positioning ensures that the patient is supported correctly throughout the transition process, enhancing safety while enabling standing access.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates sensors that provide feedback during the transition process to monitor patient position and bed configuration. This feedback mechanism allows the control system to adjust the transition dynamically, ensuring safety by detecting and responding to any anomalies during the position changes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Reliability

If multiple sensors and safety features are added, then patient safety during transition is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransition safetyVSAvoidsensor and control system
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Multiple safety functions are merged into integrated control systems. The sensors, actuators, and control logic are combined into a unified system that manages both positioning and safety functions together, reducing the apparent complexity by eliminating separate dedicated systems for each function.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The sensor and control system is designed with multi-functionality, where the same sensors and controllers serve both positioning control and safety monitoring purposes. This universality reduces the total number of components needed compared to having separate dedicated systems for each function.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS12478532B2Patient support with stand-up and sit features
Publication Date: 2025.11.25 KREG MEDICAL
  • US12478532B2 patent drawing
  • US12478532B2 patent drawing
  • US12478532B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A bed is provided having a base frame, a patient support assembly connected to the base frame. The patient support assembly is rotatable adjacent the foot end of the bed to place the patient support assembly, including the head section and foot section thereof, in a generally vertical position to allow a patient to exit the bed in a standing orientation.