Sebastiaan Theodorus Michaël Peek

Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: A systematic review

PURPOSE To provide an overview of factors influencing the acceptance of electronic technologies that support aging in place by community-dwelling older adults. Since technology acceptance factors fluctuate over time, a distinction was made between factors in the pre-implementation stage and factors in the post-implementation stage. METHODS A systematic review of mixed studies. Seven major scientific databases (including MEDLINE, Scopus and CINAHL) were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) original and peer-reviewed research, (2) qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods research, (3) research in which participants are community-dwelling older adults aged 60 years or older, and (4) research aimed at investigating factors that influence the intention to use or the actual use of electronic technology for aging in place. Three researchers each read the articles and extracted factors. RESULTS Sixteen out of 2841 articles were included. Most articles investigated acceptance of technology that enhances safety or provides social interaction. The majority of data was based on qualitative research investigating factors in the pre-implementation stage. Acceptance in this stage is influenced by 27 factors, divided into six themes: concerns regarding technology (e.g., high cost, privacy implications and usability factors); expected benefits of technology (e.g., increased safety and perceived usefulness); need for technology (e.g., perceived need and subjective health status); alternatives to technology (e.g., help by family or spouse), social influence (e.g., influence of family, friends and professional caregivers); and characteristics of older adults (e.g., desire to age in place). When comparing these results to qualitative results on post-implementation acceptance, our analysis showed that some factors are persistent while new factors also emerge. Quantitative results showed that a small number of variables have a significant influence in the pre-implementation stage. Fourteen out of the sixteen included articles did not use an existing technology acceptance framework or model. CONCLUSIONS Acceptance of technology in the pre-implementation stage is influenced by multiple factors. However, post-implementation research on technology acceptance by community-dwelling older adults is scarce and most of the factors in this review have not been tested by using quantitative methods. Further research is needed to determine if and how the factors in this review are interrelated, and how they relate to existing models of technology acceptance.

What it Takes to Successfully Implement Technology for Aging in Place: Focus Groups With Stakeholders

Background There is a growing interest in empowering older adults to age in place by deploying various types of technology (ie, eHealth, ambient assisted living technology, smart home technology, and gerontechnology). However, initiatives aimed at implementing these technologies are complicated by the fact that multiple stakeholder groups are involved. Goals and motives of stakeholders may not always be transparent or aligned, yet research on convergent and divergent positions of stakeholders is scarce. Objective To provide insight into the positions of stakeholder groups involved in the implementation of technology for aging in place by answering the following questions: What kind of technology do stakeholders see as relevant? What do stakeholders aim to achieve by implementing technology? What is needed to achieve successful implementations? Methods Mono-disciplinary focus groups were conducted with participants (n=29) representing five groups of stakeholders: older adults (6/29, 21%), care professionals (7/29, 24%), managers within home care or social work organizations (5/29, 17%), technology designers and suppliers (6/29, 21%), and policy makers (5/29, 17%). Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results Stakeholders considered 26 different types of technologies to be relevant for enabling independent living. Only 6 out of 26 (23%) types of technology were mentioned by all stakeholder groups. Care professionals mentioned fewer different types of technology than other groups. All stakeholder groups felt that the implementation of technology for aging in place can be considered a success when (1) older adults’ needs and wishes are prioritized during development and deployment of the technology, (2) the technology is accepted by older adults, (3) the technology provides benefits to older adults, and (4) favorable prerequisites for the use of technology by older adults exist. While stakeholders seemed to have identical aims, several underlying differences emerged, for example, with regard to who should pay for the technology. Additionally, each stakeholder group mentioned specific steps that need to be taken to achieve successful implementation. Collectively, stakeholders felt that they need to take the leap (ie, change attitudes, change policies, and collaborate with other organizations); bridge the gap (ie, match technology with individuals and stimulate interdisciplinary education); facilitate technology for the masses (ie, work on products and research that support large-scale rollouts and train target groups on how to use technology); and take time to reflect (ie, evaluate use and outcomes). Conclusions Stakeholders largely agree on the direction in which they should be heading; however, they have different perspectives with regard to the technologies that can be employed and the work that is needed to implement them. Central to these issues seems to be the tailoring of technology or technologies to the specific needs of each community-dwelling older adult and the work that is needed by stakeholders to support this type of service delivery on a large scale.

“Grandma, You Should Do It—It’s Cool” Older Adults and the Role of Family Members in Their Acceptance of Technology

Despite its potential, the acceptance of technology to support the ability to live independently in one’s own home, also called aging in place, is not optimal. Family members may play a key role in technology acceptance by older adults; however, it is not well understood why and how they exert influence. Based on open interviews with 53 community-dwelling older adults, this paper describes the influence of family members, including spouses, on the use of various types of consumer electronics by older adults as was reported by themselves. Such a broad focus enables understanding the use of technology as was reported by older adults, instead of its intended use. Our study reveals that the influence of each family member has its own characteristics. The influence of technology acceptance is a natural and coincidental part of the interaction with spouses and grandchildren in which entertainment and pleasure are prominent. This is also partly true for the influence of children, but their influence also is intentional and driven by concerns. Our study indicates the importance of including all family members when implementing technology in the lives of older adults. Besides information for children about the use(fullness) of devices, it is worthwhile to give grandchildren an important role, because older adults easily adopt their enthusiasm and it might eventually lighten the burden on children.

The relation between social network site usage and loneliness and mental health in community-dwelling older adults

Loneliness is expected to become an even bigger social problem in the upcoming decades, because of the growing number of older adults. It has been argued that the use of social network sites can aid in decreasing loneliness and improving mental health. The purpose of this study was to examine whether and how social network sites usage is related to loneliness and mental health in community‐dwelling older adults.

The Essential Elements for a Nursing Home According to Stakeholders from Healthcare and Technology: Perspectives from Multiple Simultaneous Monodisciplinary Workshops

Technology and architectural solutions are needed as a means of support in future nursing homes. This study investigated how various monodisciplinary groups of stakeholders from healthcare and technology envision the nursing home of the future and which elements are necessary for its creation. Moreover, differences in needs and interests between the various stakeholders were considered. This qualitative study gathered data via 10 simultaneous sticky note brainstorm sessions with 95 professional stakeholders, which resulted in 1459 quotes in five categories that were clustered into themes and processed into word clouds. The stakeholders prioritized the needs of the resident and placed the most importance on the fact that a nursing home is primarily a place to live in the final stages of ones life. A mix of factors related to the quality of care and the quality of the built environment and technology is needed. Given the fact that there are differences in what monodisciplinary groups of stakeholders see as an ideal nursing home, multidisciplinary approaches should be pursued in practice to incorporate as many new views and stakeholder needs as possible.

Origins and consequences of technology acquirement by independent-living seniors: towards an integrative model

BackgroundLiving independently can be challenging for seniors. Technologies are expected to help older adults age in place, yet little empirical research is available on how seniors develop a need for technologies, how they acquire these technologies, and how these subsequently affect their lives. Aging is complex, dynamic and personal. But how does this translate to seniors’ adoption and acceptance of technology? To better understand origins and consequences of technology acquirement by independent-living seniors, an explorative longitudinal qualitative field study was set up.MethodsHome visits were made to 33 community-dwelling seniors living in the Netherlands, on three occasions (2012–2014). Semi-structured interviews were conducted on the timeline of acquirements, and people and factors involved in acquirements. Additionally, participants were interviewed on experiences in using technologies since acquirement. Thematic analysis was employed to analyze interview transcripts, using a realist approach to better understand the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of technology acquirements.ResultsFindings were accumulated in a new conceptual model: The Cycle of Technology Acquirement by Independent-Living Seniors (C-TAILS), which provides an integrative perspective on why and how technologies are acquired, and why these may or may not prove to be appropriate and effective, considering an independent-living senior’s needs and circumstances at a given point in time. We found that externally driven and purely desire-driven acquirements led to a higher risk of suboptimal use and low levels of need satisfaction.ConclusionsTechnology acquirement by independent-living seniors may be best characterized as a heterogeneous process with many different origins, pathways and consequences. Furthermore, technologies that are acquired in ways that are not congruent with seniors’ personal needs and circumstances run a higher risk of proving to be ineffective or inappropriate. Yet, these needs and circumstances are subject to change, and the C-TAILS model can be employed to better understand contexts and mechanisms that come into play.

How to Guide the Use of Technology for Ageing-in-Place? An Evidence-Based Educational Module

Aim: Technology is suggested to support ageing-in-place. For care- and technology professionals working with older persons it is important to know how to facilitate the use of technology by older persons. This paper presents the translation of the results of a field study into multilevel and multidisciplinary educational material. Method: During home visits, community-dwelling seniors were interviewed regarding reasons for their level of technology use. All types of technology that could support activities of daily living, were included. Resulting themes formed the basis of the development of personas and scripts for education. Next, lecturers from vocational and higher technical and care education developed an evidence-based educational module from the perspective of professional service provision. Results: 53 older adults were interviewed. The level of technology use is influenced by six themes: challenges in the domain of independent living; behavioural options; personal thoughts on technology use; influence of the social network; influence of organisations; and the role of the physical environment. Four personas were developed, one of which was featured into a film, with twelve separate scenes. For each scene, lessons were developed that consisted of specific questions (first level), in-depth questions (second level) and suggestions for classes (for lecturers). Three personas were translated into case histories. Conclusion: Older adults’ perceptions and use of technology are embedded in their personal, social, and physical context. To improve successful technology use to support ageing-in-place, professionals from the domain of care and technology can be trained to be aware of these factors.