Evaluating the sit‐to‐stand transfer assistance from a smart walker in older adults with motor impairments

Abstract

Aim To evaluate the effectiveness and user satisfaction with the sit‐to‐stand (STS) assistance system of a smart walker (SW), and to identify factors associated with them in potential users. Methods A total of 33 older adults (29 women, aged ≥65 years) with motor impairments (habitual rollator use) and no severe cognitive impairment (Mini‐Mental State Examination ≥17 points) carried out a Five‐Chair Stand Test without assistance and five STS transfers with the STS assistance system. Based on the number of successfully completed STS transfers, success rates were calculated for the Five‐Chair Stand Test and the SW‐assisted STS transfers, and compared using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test. User satisfaction was assessed using the Tele‐healthcare Satisfaction Questionnaire‐Wearable Technology (0–80 points, higher score = higher satisfaction). Bivariate correlations and multiple linear regression analyses were used to identify participant characteristics associated with the success rate and user satisfaction with the STS assistance system. Results The success rate for the SW‐assisted STS transfers was significantly higher than for the Five‐Chair Stand Test (93.3 ± 12.9% vs 54.5 ± 50.6%, P < 0.001). User satisfaction was high (Tele‐healthcare Satisfaction Questionnaire‐Wearable Technology 62.5 ± 11.2 points). The success rate with the STS assistance system was not significantly associated with any participant characteristics. Higher body mass index was a significant independent predictor of higher user satisfaction. Conclusions The SW‐integrated STS assistance system can provide effective STS support with high user satisfaction for a wide range of potential users. Our findings suggest the high potential of the STS assistance system for promoting mobility, independence and quality of life for older adults with motor impairments. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 312–316.

Ambient assisted living technology‐mediated interventions for older people and their informal carers in the context of healthy ageing: A scoping review

“…16% (n = 14) of the studies aimed to support basic daily needs and functions such as nutrition, mobility, medication intake, self‐care, and hearing 56‐69 . The technology used consisted of motion sensors, 63 medication dispensers, 66,67 hearing aids, 56,57 and tablet or mobile apps, 58,65,68 robots, 59,61 a scooter, 60 a smart walker, 62 and electric light wires 64 …”

“…Three studies were case reports, 57,66,67 one RCT 69 and one qualitative 61 . Results reported were an increase in medication adherence 58,66,67 and improvements or maintenance in activity performance and participation among older participants 59,60,62,65,69 . For the studies focusing on hearing impairment, McInerney and Walden 57 reported positive results with fewer communication breakdowns among the older participants, while in the study by Jupiter, 56 the older participants disliked or simply forgot to use the technology.…”

“…Sekiguchi et al 55 assessed the burden of care and found a decrease in five of 17 cases. [28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] (n = 2) 40,41 42 Activities for social engagement, comfort, or well-being 15 (n = 9) 43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51 (n = 5) 52,53,54 , Van der 55,56 57 Support for daily needs and activities 14 (n = 7) 58,59,60,61,62,63,64 (n = 2) 65,66 (n = 5) [67][68][69][70]71 Monitoring symptoms for self-care 11 (n = 5) 72,73,74,75,76 (n = 5) 77,78,79,80,81 82 Education to support selfefficacy and social inclusion 8 ( n = 6 ) 83,…”

“…Supervision for increased safety 7 ( n = 2 ) 99,100 (n = 2) 101,102 (n = 3) [103][104][105] Exercise to regain physical functions 5 ( n = 5) 106,107,108,109,110 Receiving therapy from a distance hearing. [56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69] The technology used consisted of motion sensors, 63 medication dispensers, 66,67 hearing aids, 56,57 and tablet or mobile apps, 58,65,68 robots, 59,61 a scooter, 60 a smart walker, 62 and electric light wires. 64 The studies were from 3 weeks to 4 years in duration.…”

“…61 Results reported were an increase in medication adherence 58,66,67 and improvements or maintenance in activity performance and participation among older participants. 59,60,62,65,69 For the studies focusing on the study by Lindhardt and Nielsen. 68 Dupuy et al 63 assessed the burden for professional caregivers and found that the burden increased more during the study period for the control group compared to the technology-equipped group.…”