4.2 Article

Senior residents' perceived need of and preferences for smart home sensor technologies

Journal

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462307080154

Keywords

technology; housing for the elderly; telemetry; home care

Funding

  1. NLM NIH HHS [T15-LM07089-14] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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-gene rated 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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available