Dataset Information

Impacts of Low-cost Robotic Pets for Older Adults and People With Dementia: Scoping Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Older adults and people with dementia are particularly vulnerable to social isolation. Social robots, including robotic pets, are promising technological interventions that can benefit the psychosocial health of older adults and people with dementia. However, issues such as high costs can lead to a lack of equal access and concerns about infection control. Although there are previous reviews on the use of robotic pets for older adults and people with dementia, none have included or had a focus on low-cost and familiarly and realistically designed pet robots.

Objective

The aim of this review is to synthesize evidence on the delivery and impact of low-cost, familiarly and realistically designed interactive robotic pets for older adults and people with dementia.

Methods

The Arksey and O'Malley framework was used to guide this review. First, the research question was identified. Second, searches were conducted on five electronic databases and Google Scholar. Studies were selected using a two-phase screening process, where two reviewers independently screened and extracted data using a standardized data extraction form. Finally, the results were discussed, categorized, and presented narratively.

Results

A total of 9 studies were included in the review. Positive impacts related to several psychosocial domains, including mood and affect, communication and social interaction, companionship, and other well-being outcomes. Issues and concerns associated with its use included misperceptions of the robotic pets as a live animal, ethical issues of attachment, negative reactions by users, and other pragmatic concerns such as hygiene and cost.

Conclusions

Overall, the findings resonate with previous studies that investigated the effectiveness of other social robots, demonstrating the promise of these low-cost robotic pets in addressing the psychosocial needs of older adults and people with dementia. The affordability of these robotic pets appeared to influence the practicalities of real-world use, such as intervention delivery and infection control, which are especially relevant in light of COVID-19. Moving forward, studies should also consider comparing the effects of these low-cost robots with other robotic pets.

SUBMITTER: Koh WQ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8082946 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPsychosocial issues, such as social isolation and loneliness among older adults and people with dementia, continue to pose challenges with a rapidly aging population worldwide. Social robots are a rapidly emerging field of technology, developed to help address the psychosocial needs of this population. Although studies have reported positive findings regarding their psychosocial benefits, their implementation in real-world practice remains a challenge. Nevertheless, little is known about the factors affecting their implementation. The purpose of this review is to provide a systematic overview of the barriers and facilitators affecting the implementation of social robots for older adults and people with dementia.MethodThe Arksey and O'Malley approach with methodological enhancement by Levac et al. was used to guide the conduct of this review. Seven electronic databases were searched. In addition, hand searching and backward citation tracing was conducted. Three independent reviewers were involved in the screening and data charting process. Findings were synthesised and categorised into the five domains outlined in the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR).ResultsA total of 53 studies were included in the final review. Most of the included studies were based in participants' homes and in care facilities. Barriers and facilitators were mapped onto 18 constructs in the five domains of the CFIR. The most frequently cited barriers were mapped to the constructs within the domain of "Intervention characteristics", where issues such as the complexity of using the technology and technical obstacles impeded implementation. Most facilitators were mapped onto the domain "Patient needs and resources". Overall, existing research are disproportionately focused on the internal validity (i.e. characteristics) of social robots, and there is significantly less research investigating their external validity, such as organisational or wider contextual factors that can affect their implementation in real-world practice.ConclusionThis review has identified and synthesised the breadth of evidence on the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of social robots for older adults and people with dementia. Future research should pay more attention to investigating the contextual factors, using an implementation framework, to identify barriers and facilitators to guide the implementation of social robots.

Project description:BackgroundPsychosocial health issues such as depression and social isolation are an important cause of morbidity and premature mortality for older adults and people with dementia. Social robots are promising technological innovations to deliver effective psychosocial interventions to promote psychosocial wellbeing. Studies have reported positive findings regarding this technology on the psychosocial health of older adults and people with dementia. However, despite positive findings of the effects of social robots for older adults and people with dementia, little is known about factors affecting their implementation in practice.MethodsThis study follows Arksey and O'Malley's approach and methodological enhancement by Levac et al. Relevant articles will be identified by searching electronic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Compendex and PubMed. A two-phase screening process will be undertaken by two independent reviewers to determine articles' inclusion. Findings will be summarised and reported thematically based on domains in the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR) and presented narratively. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) will guide the reporting of findings.DiscussionReporting the protocol in advance of conducting the review will ensure that rigorous and transparent methodological approach is undertaken. The outcomes of the review include identifying variants in terminologies used to describe implementation, identifying the scope of the literature regarding the barriers and facilitators affecting the implementation of social robots and identifying research gaps to guide further empirical research in this field. This evidence synthesis constitutes part of a bigger project aimed to develop implementation guidelines for social robotics for older adults with dementia. Since the methodological process consists of reviewing and collecting data from publicly available data, this study does not require approval from a research ethics board.Scoping review registrationOur protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/2x3y9/ ) as an open access article, under the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC-4.0) license, which allows others to distribute, remix, adapt and build on this work on a non-commercial basis, and license their derivative work using different terms, on the basis that the original basis is properly cited and the use is non-commercial ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ ).

Project description:BackgroundNumerous living labs have established a new approach for studying the health, independent living, and well-being of older adults with dementia. Living labs interact with a broad set of stakeholders, including students, academic institutions, private companies, health care organizations, and patient representative bodies and even with other living labs. Hence, it is crucial to identify the types of cocreations that should be attempted and how they can be facilitated through living labs.ObjectiveThis study aims to scope publications that examine all types of living lab activities, exploring the needs and expectations of older adults with dementia and seeking solutions, whether they live in the community or long-term health care facilities (LTHFs).MethodsThis scoping review was reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) recommendations for the extension of scoping reviews. We searched six bibliographic databases for publications up to March 2020, and a forward-backward citation chasing was performed. Additional searches were conducted using Google Scholar. The quality of the selected papers was assessed.ResultsOf the 5609 articles identified, we read 58 (1.03%) articles and retained 12 (0.21%) articles for inclusion and final analysis. All 12 articles presented an innovative product, developed in 4 main living labs, to assist older adults with cognitive disorders or dementia living in the community or LTHFs. The objectives of these studies were to optimize health, quality of life, independent living, home care, and safety of older adults with cognitive disorders or dementia, as well as to support professional and family caregivers or reduce their burdens. The overall methodological quality of the studies ranged from poor to moderate.ConclusionsThis scoping review identified several living labs playing a pivotal role in research aimed at older adults with dementia living in the community or LTHFs. However, it also revealed that living labs should conduct more better-quality interventional research to prove the effectiveness of their technological products or service solutions.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2147/SHTT.S233130.

Project description:AimTo summarise the psychological impacts of social isolation amongst older adults during COVID-19 and review the benefits and limitations of online interventions used to combat social isolation.DesignA scoping review was performed.Data sourcesA systematic search was performed from October 2020 to January 2021 in seven electronic databases: China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. A hand search of the reference lists of included papers and WHO publications was performed. Grey literature search was carried out from Scopus, ProQuest Dissertation and Google Scholar.Review methodsStudies were screened, appraised and extracted independently by two reviewers. Thematic analysis was used to synthesise data, which were presented in a descriptive manner and organised into categories and themes.ResultsTotally, 33 studies were included. Four themes and eight sub-themes emerged: (1) negative impacts and experiences of older adults during social isolation, (2) adopting coping behaviours in the midst of COVID-19, (3) online interventions to combat the consequences of social isolation, (4) barriers to online intervention.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic has taken an emotional toll on older adults' psychological wellbeing and has highlighted the untapped strengths of older adults facing isolation. Online interventions, which could be a new normal in the COVID era, were beneficial in combating social isolation. Strategies by various stakeholders were recommended to tackle the barriers of online interventions.ImpactWith the COVID-19 pandemic still in progress, this review provides insights on the psychological impacts of social isolation amongst older adults. Nurses in the community and long-term care facilities could adopt strategies and online intervention to better support the older adults, contribute to a stronger COVID-19 response and support system, and an overall better road to recovery from this crisis.

Project description:BackgroundUse of companion robots may reduce older people's depression, loneliness and agitation. This benefit has to be contrasted against possible ethical concerns raised by philosophers in the field around issues such as deceit, infantilisation, reduced human contact and accountability. Research directly assessing prevalence of such concerns among relevant stakeholders, however, remains limited, even though their views clearly have relevance in the debate. For example, any discrepancies between ethicists and stakeholders might in itself be a relevant ethical consideration while concerns perceived by stakeholders might identify immediate barriers to successful implementation.MethodsWe surveyed 67 younger adults after they had live interactions with companion robot pets while attending an exhibition on intimacy, including the context of intimacy for older people. We asked about their perceptions of ethical issues. Participants generally had older family members, some with dementia.ResultsMost participants (40/67, 60%) reported having no ethical concerns towards companion robot use when surveyed with an open question. Twenty (30%) had some concern, the most common being reduced human contact (10%), followed by deception (6%). However, when choosing from a list, the issue perceived as most concerning was equality of access to devices based on socioeconomic factors (m = 4.72 on a scale 1-7), exceeding more commonly hypothesized issues such as infantilising (m = 3.45), and deception (m = 3.44). The lowest-scoring issues were potential for injury or harm (m = 2.38) and privacy concerns (m = 2.17). Over half (39/67 (58%)) would have bought a device for an older relative. Cost was a common reason for choosing not to purchase a device.ConclusionsAlthough a relatively small study, we demonstrated discrepancies between ethical concerns raised in the philosophical literature and those likely to make the decision to buy a companion robot. Such discrepancies, between philosophers and 'end-users' in care of older people, and in methods of ascertainment, are worthy of further empirical research and discussion. Our participants were more concerned about economic issues and equality of access, an important consideration for those involved with care of older people. On the other hand the concerns proposed by ethicists seem unlikely to be a barrier to use of companion robots.