Enablers and barriers to the implementation of socially assistive humanoid robots in health and social care: a systematic review

Abstract

ObjectivesSocially assistive humanoid robots are considered a promising technology to tackle the challenges in health and social care posed by the growth of the ageing population. The purpose of our study was to explore the current evidence on barriers and enablers for the implementation of humanoid robots in health and social care.DesignSystematic review of studies entailing hands-on interactions with a humanoid robot.SettingFrom April 2018 to June 2018, databases were searched using a combination of the same search terms for articles published during the last decade. Data collection was conducted by using theRayyansoftware, a standardised predefined grid, and a risk of bias and a quality assessment tool.ParticipantsPost-experimental data were collected and analysed for a total of 420 participants. Participants comprised: older adults (n=307) aged ≥60 years, with no or some degree of age-related cognitive impairment, residing either in residential care facilities or at their home; care home staff (n=106); and informal caregivers (n=7).Primary outcomesIdentification of enablers and barriers to the implementation of socially assistive humanoid robots in health and social care, and consequent insights and impact. Future developments to inform further research.ResultsTwelve studies met the eligibility criteria and were included. None of the selected studies had an experimental design; hence overall quality was low, with high risks of biases. Several studies had no comparator, no baseline, small samples, and self-reported measures only. Within this limited evidence base, the enablers found were enjoyment, usability, personalisation and familiarisation. Barriers were related to technical problems, to the robots’ limited capabilities and the negative preconceptions towards the use of robots in healthcare. Factors which produced mixed results were the robot’s human-like attributes, previous experience with technology and views of formal and informal carers.ConclusionsThe available evidence related to implementation factors of socially assistive humanoid robots for older adults is limited, mainly focusing on aspects at individual level, and exploring acceptance of this technology. Investigation of elements linked to the environment, organisation, societal and cultural milieu, policy and legal framework is necessary.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018092866.

Are friends electric? The benefits and risks of human-robot relationships

“…The interactive and dynamic features of social robots, and their ability to understand and respond to human emotion, make them candidate solutions for application domains that require social engagement and comfort. In healthcare, social robots are being investigated and implemented as tools to assist patients by means of emotional support across the lifespan, from pediatric populations ( Kabacińska et al., 2020 ) to older adults ( Broekens et al., 2009 ; Robinson et al., 2014 ; Prescott and Caleb-Solly, 2017 ; Pu et al., 2018 ; Papadopoulos et al., 2020 ). In education, social robots are being used as tutors or co-learners to promote cognitive and affective outcomes including social skills development ( Belpaeme et al., 2018 ).…”

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of social robots for older adults and people with dementia: a scoping review protocol

“…The recent systematic review by Papadopoulos et al [ 15 ] has provided important insights relating to the implementation of SAHRs. Our review differs in that it encompasses a broader scope to allow inquiry into the implementation of all variants of social robots.…”

“…Despite positive findings with regards to the effects of social robots for older adults, little is known about how to ensure that these interventions are implemented in practice. Papadopoulos and colleagues conducted a systematic review of twelve articles to identify enablers and barriers to the implementation of socially assistive humanoid robots (SAHR) in health and social care [ 15 ]. The authors found that facilitators include participants’ enjoyment, intuitiveness and ease of use of the SAHR, personalisation of SAHR services to users’ needs, as well as familiarity towards the SAHR.…”

Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Social Robots for Older Adults and People with Dementia: A Scoping Review Protocol

“…This taxonomy consists of eight constructs, which includes: acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, delity, implementation cost, penetration and sustainability. Some of these concepts have been used in studies to describe implementation of SAHRs (15). Therefore, use of these concepts as part of the search strategy will likely yield relevant results and ensure thoroughness of the searches.…”

“…Despite positive ndings with regards to the effects of social robots for older adults, little is known about how to ensure that these interventions are implemented in practice. Papadopoulos and colleagues conducted a systematic review of twelve articles to identify enablers and barriers to the implementation of socially assistive humanoid robots (SAHR) in health and social care (15). The authors found that facilitators include participants' enjoyment, intuitiveness and ease of use of the SAHR, personalisation of SAHR services to users' needs, as well as familiarity towards the SAHR.…”