Assistive technologies at home for people with a memory disorder

Nauha, Laura; Keränen, Niina; Kangas, Maarit; Jämsä, Timo; Reponen, Jarmo

doi:10.1177/1471301216674816

Cited by 27 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the interest of brevity, only the first 60% will be listed. The intervention most often noted was an interview [3,[22][23][24][25]29,31,39,43,44,49,57,59,61,63,65]. Researchers interviewed users of AT (PWD and carers) in 16/48 studies (33%).…”

Section: Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These are presented in Table 2 . Table 1 and Table 2 lists articles in reverse chronological order: 2019 (4) [ 3 , 19 , 20 , 21 ], 2018 (12) [ 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 ], 2017 (14) [ 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 ], 2016 (11) [ 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 ], 2015 (7) [ 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three of these studies originated from the United States, while the others were from single originations: Greece, Canada, Pakistan, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom. The theme complex interfaces (pushing buttons does not always yield the desired result, system was perceived to be complex, complex setup) occurred in 7/75 occurrences (9%) [3,23,25,29,30,51,53]. These studies all came from single originations: Netherlands, Greece, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Canada, Netherlands/Germany/Belgium.…”

Section: Barriers To the Adoption Of Atmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluating the Facilitators, Barriers, and Medical Outcomes Commensurate with the Use of Assistive Technology to Support People with Dementia: A Systematic Review Literature

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Assistive technologies (AT) have been used to improve the daily living conditions of people living with dementia (PWD). Research supports the positive impact of the use of AT such as decreased burden on caregivers and behavioral support for people with dementia. Four reviews in the last six years have analyzed AT and PWD, but none have incorporated the dimension of medical outcomes. Objectives: The purpose of this review is to identify the facilitators, barriers, and medical outcomes commensurate with the use of AT with PWD. Method: This review queried The Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, Science Direct, and PubMed databases for peer-reviewed publications in the last five years for facilitators, barriers, and medical outcomes commensurate with the use of AT with PWD. The study is reported and conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) and the Kruse Protocol for conducting a systematic review. Results: 48 studies were analyzed. Fourteen types of AT, 17 facilitators, 17 barriers, and 16 medical outcomes were identified in the literature. The two most frequently mentioned ATs were cognitive stimulators (9/48, 19%) and social robots (5/48, 10%). The two most frequently mentioned facilitators were caregivers want AT (8/68, 12%) and enables increased independence (7/68, 10%). The top two barriers were cost (8/75, 11%) and PWD reject AT (8/75, 11%). The top medical outcomes were improved cognitive abilities (6/69, 9%), increased activities of daily living (ADLs), and increased autonomy (each at 5/69, 7%): Zero negative outcomes were reported. Conclusion: The systematic review revealed the positive relations that occur when PWD and their caregivers use AT. Although many reservations surrounding the use of AT exist, a majority of the literature shows a positive effect of its use. Research supports a strong support for AT by caregivers due to many positive medical outcomes, but also a reticence to adopt by PWD. If ATs for PWD are a way to reduce stress on caregivers, barriers of cost and complexity need to be addressed through health policy or grants.

show abstract

Section: Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Barriers To the Adoption Of Atmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating the Facilitators, Barriers, and Medical Outcomes Commensurate with the Use of Assistive Technology to Support People with Dementia: A Systematic Review Literature

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The information provided by RAM may contribute to more accurate information on daily activities, improved communication, early identification of problems, and facilitation of caregiving (Nauha, Keranen, Kangas, Jamsa, & Reponen, 2016;Nijhof, van Gemert-Pijnen, Woolrych, & Sixsmith, 2013;Wild, Mattek, Austin, & Kaye, 2016;Williams, Arthur, Niedens, Moushey, & Hutfles, 2013). There are several barriers to implementing and utilizing RAM, including cumbersome devices (Matthews et al, 2015), a lack of user-friendly interfaces (Nauha et al, 2016;Preusse, Mitzner, Fausset, & Rogers, 2017), frequent false alarms (Mitchell et al, 2018;Nauha et al, 2016;Nijhof et al, 2013), and unanticipated technological difficulties (Mitchell et al, 2018;Nauha et al, 2016;Williams et al, 2013). Beyond technical problems, the trade-off between privacy and usefulness of monitoring is an important ethical issue (Mitchell et al, 2018;Mulvenna et al, 2017;Wild, Boise, Lundell, & Foucek, 2008;Williams et al, 2013).…”

Section: Background: Efficacy and Effectiveness Of Remote Activity Momentioning

confidence: 99%

Six-Month Effectiveness of Remote Activity Monitoring for Persons Living With Dementia and Their Family Caregivers: An Experimental Mixed Methods Study

Gaugler¹,

Zmora

Mitchell

et al. 2018

The Gerontologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We found that the early months spent calibrating and modifying RAM are potentially challenging for families, which may prevent this technology from improving caregiving outcomes during initial months of use. Remote activity monitoring may work optimally for caregivers of persons living with ADRD in specific situations (e.g., earlier stages of dementia; wandering risk), which suggests the need for appropriate needs assessments that can better target such innovations.

show abstract

“…Automating daily tasks and home maintenance(Fausset et al 2011;Ghazal and Al-Khatib 2015) 5. Reminding and prompting older people to support independence and safety daily life despite cognitive decline(Nauha et al 2016;Gibson et al 2015; Lorenz et al 2017 6. Enable communication and connection with broader social and caregiving networks 7.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ageing in place and the internet of things – how smart home technologies, the built environment and caregiving intersect

Carnemolla

2018

Vis. in Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Smart technologies and the Internet of Things (IoT), have the potential to play a significant role in enabling older people to age in place. Although there has been substantial development of new applications of sensor technology in the home, this has tended to be tele-health focused, and there has been less work done on the role of IoT and ageing in place that more broadly considers caregiving and the built environment. Research in the field of IoT development and evaluation has recognised a number of challenges and limitations associated with past smart technology developments to support Ageing in Place, calling for user centeredness and better integration with broader systems. Compounding this, research into Ageing in Place and home environments has focused on built environments and largely ignored the impact of technology in the lives of older people staying at home. Recognising a gap in acknowledging the potential impact of technology on Ageing in Place theories, the purpose of this paper is to conceptualise a way of framing smart technology within an Ageing in Place model that acknowledges the interaction of smart technology with the built environment and caregiving and to present a framework for visualising the interactions that take place. A review of Environmental Gerontology model development is undertaken and a new model is presented that recognises the role of technology in Ageing in Place. Based on this model, a template is developed and three case studies of older people's experiences of smart home technology, home modifications and caregiving are mapped out. These are used to demonstrate "proof of concept" of the relationships put forward in the HAST model and the pre-curser for a template to help people map smart technology and its role in supporting caregiving and ageing in place. This paper's position is that technologies such as IoT further support the role of the built environment and caregiving to produce outcomes that enable older people to remain autonomous, independent, safe and well at home. However, a number of risks were also identified through the case studies, the issues of maintenance, cost and ease of use, and willingness to use are considerations and potential barriers to the benefits of smart technology.

show abstract

Assistive technologies at home for people with a memory disorder

Cited by 27 publications

References 27 publications

Evaluating the Facilitators, Barriers, and Medical Outcomes Commensurate with the Use of Assistive Technology to Support People with Dementia: A Systematic Review Literature

Evaluating the Facilitators, Barriers, and Medical Outcomes Commensurate with the Use of Assistive Technology to Support People with Dementia: A Systematic Review Literature

Six-Month Effectiveness of Remote Activity Monitoring for Persons Living With Dementia and Their Family Caregivers: An Experimental Mixed Methods Study

Ageing in place and the internet of things – how smart home technologies, the built environment and caregiving intersect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About