Hostname: page-component-669899f699-8p65j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-27T05:16:44.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Senior residents’ perceived need of and preferences for “smart home” sensor technologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2008

George Demiris ,
Brian K. Hensel ,
Marjorie Skubic  and
Marilyn Rantz
George Demiris
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Brian K. Hensel
Affiliation:
University of Missouri–Columbia
Marjorie Skubic
Affiliation:
University of Missouri–Columbia
Marilyn Rantz
Affiliation:
University of Missouri–Columbia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The goal of meeting the desire of older adults to remain independent in their home setting while controlling healthcare costs has led to the conceptualization of “smart homes.” A smart home is a residence equipped with technology that enhances safety of residents and monitors their health conditions. The study aim is to assess older adults’ perceptions of specific smart home technologies (i.e., a bed sensor, gait monitor, stove sensor, motion sensor, and video sensor).

Methods: The study setting is TigerPlace, a retirement community designed according to the Aging in Place model. Focus group sessions with fourteen residents were conducted to assess perceived advantages and concerns associated with specific applications, and preferences for recipients of sensor-generated information pertaining to residents’ activity levels, sleep patterns and potential emergencies. Sessions were audio-taped; tapes were transcribed, and a content analysis was performed.

Results: A total of fourteen older adults over the age of 65 participated in three focus group sessions Most applications were perceived as useful, and participants would agree to their installation in their own home. Preference for specific sensors related to sensors’ appearance and residents’ own level of frailty and perceived need. Specific concerns about privacy were raised.

Conclusions: The findings indicate an overall positive attitude toward sensor technologies for nonobtrusive monitoring. Researchers and practitioners are called upon to address ethical and technical challenges in this emerging domain.

Keywords

TechnologyHousing for the elderlyTelemetryHome care
Type
RESEARCH REPORTS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , January 2008 , pp. 120 - 124
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1. Alwan, M, Dalal, S, Kell, S, Felder, R. Derivation of basic human gait characteristics from floor vibrations. 2003 Summer Bioengineering Conference. Key Biscayne, FL; 2003.Google Scholar
2. Alwan, M, Kell, S, Dalal, S, Turner, B, Mack, D, Felder, R. In-home monitoring system and objective adl assessment: Validation study. Presented at the International Conference on Independence, Aging and Disability. Washington, DC; 2003.Google Scholar
3. Barrett, J, Kirk, S. Running focus groups with elderly and disabled elderly participants. Appl Ergon. 2000;31:621–629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Chan, M, Bocquet, H, Campo, E, Val, T, Pous, J. 1999, Alarm communication network to help carers of the elderly for safety purposes: A survey of a project. Int J Rehabil Res. 1999;22:131–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Creswell, JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1998.Google Scholar
6. Dadd, M, Doyle, B, Wilson, L, Gunaratnam, M. Lessons learned from the Hospital Without Walls project. J Telemed Telecare. 2002;8 (Suppl 3):11–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Demiris, G, Rantz, MJ, Aud, MA, et al. Older adults’ attitudes towards and perceptions of ‘smart home’ technologies: A pilot study. Med Inform Internet Med. 2004;29:87–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Elger, G, Furugren, B. SmartBo-an ICT and computer-based demonstration home for disabled people. Proceedings of the 3rd TIDE Congress: Technology for inclusive design and equality improving the quality of life for the European citizen. Helsinki, Finland; 1998.Google Scholar
9. Kidd, CD, Orr, RJ, Abowd, GD, et al. The aware home: A living laboratory for ubiquitous computing research. In the Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Cooperative Buildings—CoBuild ‘99; 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Krueger, RA. Analyzing & reporting focus group results. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Krueger, RA, Casey, MA. Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2000.Google Scholar
12. Marek, KD, Rantz, MJ. Aging in place: A new model for long term care. Nurs Adm Q. 2000;24:1–11.Google Scholar
13. Morrow, DG, Stine-Morrow, EA, Leirer, VO, Andrassy, JM, Kahn, J. The role of reader age and focus of attention in creating situation models from narratives. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 1997;52:73–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Rantz, MJ, Marek, KD. TigerPlace: A partnership with Americare and the Sinclair School of Nursing. Nurs Outlook. 2004;52:68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Tun, PA, Wingfield, A. Language and communication: Fundamentals of speech communication and language processing in old age. In: Fisk, AD, Rogers, WA, eds. Handbook of human factors and the older adult. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1997:125–149.Google Scholar
16. Wang, L, Tan, T, Ning, H, Hu, W. Silhouette analysis-based gait recognition for human identification. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2003;25:1505–1518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Demiris supplementary material

Demiris supplementary material

Download Demiris supplementary material(File)
File 2.1 MB