Older adults with a chronic health condition (e.g. hypertension) use various self-management methods. Healthcare technologies have the potential to support health self-management. However, it is necessary to understand the acceptance of these technologies as a precursor to older adults’ adoption and integration into their health plan. Our focus was on the factors older adults with hypertension initially consider when introduced to three new healthcare technologies that might support their health self-management. We compared their considerations for a blood pressure monitor, an electronic pillbox and a multifunction robot to simulate incrementally more complex technologies. Twenty-three participants (aged 65–84) completed four questionnaires and a semi-structured interview. The interview transcripts were analysed using a thematic analysis approach. We identified the factors that were frequently mentioned among the participants for each of the three healthcare technologies. The factors that older adults initially considered were familiarity, perceived benefits, perceived ease of use, perceived need for oneself, relative advantage, complexity and perceived need for others. Upon further reflection, participants considered advice acceptance, compatibility, convenience, facilitating conditions, perceived usefulness, privacy, subjective norm, and trust. We integrated the factors that older adults considered into the Healthcare Technology Acceptance Model (H-TAM), which elucidates the complexity of healthcare technology acceptance and provides guidance for future explorations.

Aging in place (AIP) is a term that is commonly used and defined in a plethora of ways. Multiple disciplines take a different stance on the definition of AIP, and its definition has evolved over time. Such diverse ways to define AIP could be a barrier to reach a shared expectation among multiple stakeholders when formulating research studies, making policy decisions, developing care plans, or designing technology tools to support older adults. We conducted a scoping review for the term 'aging in place' to understand specifically how it has been defined across time and disciplines. We collected exemplary definitions of AIP from seven databases that represent different fields of study; AgeLine, Anthropology Plus, Art and Architecture Source, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, and SocINDEX. We conducted a thematic analysis to identify the common concepts that emerged across the definitions identified in the scoping review. We developed three main categories from the themes; space, person, and time to illustrate the root of meaning across the definitions. Intersectionality across the categories yielded a comprehensive understanding of AIP, which does not constrain its definition to a place-related phenomenon. Instead, it opened the idea that AIP is a journey across one's (person) lifespan (time) in a residential environment of their choosing (space). Therefore, coming to a common understanding of the term 'aging in place', policymakers, researchers, technology designers, and caregivers can better support those who aim to age in the place of their choice.

Smart technologies (e.g., smartphones, smart security technologies, digital home assistants) have advanced over the years and will continue to do so. There are various benefits to using these technologies in one's life, such as an increase in productivity through automation and self-monitoring one's health. Older adults particularly may benefit from smart technologies to support their everyday activities and compensate for age related changes. In this study, we explored the experiences and attitudes of eighty older adults including those who had prior experience and those who had never used (or perhaps never heard of) smart technologies through an online survey. We assessed their general opinions toward using smart technology and explored what facilitated or hindered their use. Older adults rated the facilitators to use for each smart technology differently, with few commonalities between the order of the most agreed upon facilitators. However, older adults' opinions were consistent across each technology about their ignorance of technological features and cost of the smart technology, which could be potential barriers to use. Among those who had never used one of the smart technologies, privacy was the most commonly endorsed concern. The results from this study support the understanding of key considerations when developing and deploying smart technologies for older adults.

No abstract

No abstract