How I want technology used in my care: Learning from documented choices of people living with dementia using a dyadic decision making tool

References

• Peek STM, Wouters EJM, van Hoof J, Luijkx KG, Boeije HR, Vrijhoef HJM. Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform. 2014;83(4):235–48. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Boekel LC, Wouters EJM, Grimberg BM, van der Meer NJM, Luijkx KG. Perspectives of stakeholders on technology use in the care of community-living older adults with dementia: a systematic literature review. Healthcare (Basel). 2019;7(2):73. doi:10.3390/healthcare7020073.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vermeer Y, Higgs P, Charlesworth G. What do we require from surveillance technology? A review of the needs of people with dementia and informal caregivers. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng. 2019;6:2055668319869517–2055668319869517. doi:10.1177/2055668319869517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Astell Arlene J, Bouranis N, Hoey J, Lindauer A, Mihailidis A, Nugent C, Robillard Julie M. Technology and dementia: the future is now. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2019;47(3):131–39. doi:10.1159/000497800.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moyle W. The promise of technology in the future of dementia care. Nat Rev Neurol. 2019;15(6):353–59. doi:10.1038/s41582-019-0188-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thordardottir B, Malmgren Fänge A, Lethin C, Rodriguez Gatta D, Chiatti C. Acceptance and use of innovative assistive technologies among people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers: a systematic review. BioMed Res Int. 2019;2019:9196729–9196718. doi:10.1155/2019/9196729.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard R, Gathercole R, Bradley R, Harper E, Davis L, Pank L, Lam N, Talbot E, Hooper E, Winson R, et al. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of assistive technology and telecare for independent living in dementia: a randomised controlled trial. Age Ageing. 2021;50(3):882–90. doi:10.1093/ageing/afaa284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berridge C, Demiris G, Kaye J. Domain experts on dementia-care technologies: mitigating risk in design and implementation. Sci Eng Ethics. 2021;27(1):14–14. doi:10.1007/s11948-021-00286-w.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stavropoulos TG, Lazarou I, Diaz A, Gove D, Georges J, Manyakov NV, Pich EM, Hinds C, Tsolaki M, Nikolopoulos S, et al. Wearable devices for assessing function in Alzheimer’s disease: a European public involvement activity about the features and preferences of patients and caregivers. Front Aging Neurosci. 2021;13:643135–643135. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2021.643135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorpe J, Forchhammer BH, Maier AM. Adapting mobile and wearable technology to provide support and monitoring in rehabilitation for dementia: feasibility case series. JMIR Form Res. 2019;3(4):e12346–e12346. doi:10.2196/12346.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wan L, Muller C, Wulf V, Randall D Addressing the subtleties in dementia care. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2014. p. 3987–96 doi:10.1145/2556288.2557307.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson G, Dickinson C, Brittain K, Robinson L. The everyday use of assistive technology by people with dementia and their family carers: a qualitative study. BMC Geriatr. 2015;15(1):89–89. doi:10.1186/s12877-015-0091-3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gibson G, Dickinson C, Brittain K, Robinson L. Personalisation, customisation and bricolage: how people with dementia and their families make assistive technology work for them. Ageing Soc. 2019;39(11):2502–19. doi:10.1017/S0144686X18000661.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holthe T, Halvorsrud L, Karterud D, Hoel K-A, Lund A. Usability and acceptability of technology for community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic literature review. Clin Interv Aging. 2018;13:863–86. doi:10.2147/CIA.S154717.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farina N, Sherlock G, Thomas S, Lowry RG, Banerjee S. Acceptability and feasibility of wearing activity monitors in community‐dwelling older adults with dementia. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2019;34(4):617–24. doi:10.1002/gps.5064.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lariviere M, Poland F, Woolham J, Newman S, Fox C. Placing assistive technology and telecare in everyday practices of people with dementia and their caregivers: findings from an embedded ethnography of a national dementia trial. BMC Geriatr. 2021;21(1):121–121. doi:10.1186/s12877-020-01896-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robillard JM, Cleland I, Hoey J, Nugent C. Ethical adoption: a new imperative in the development of technology for dementia. Alzheimers Dement. 2018;14(9):1104–13. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2018.04.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godwin B. The ethical evaluation of assistive technology for practitioners: a checklist arising from a participatory study with people with dementia, family and professionals. J Assist Technol. 2012;6(2):123–35. doi:10.1108/17549451211234975.
   Google Scholar
• Berridge C, Turner NR, Liu L, Karras SW, Chen A, Fredriksen-Goldsen K, Demiris G. Advance planning for technology use in dementia care: development, design, and feasibility of a novel self-administered decision-making tool. JMIR Aging. 2022;5(3):e39335–e39335. doi:10.2196/39335.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Miller LM, Whitlatch CJ, Lyons KS. Shared decision-making in dementia: a review of patient and family carer involvement. Dementia. 2016;15(5):1141–57. doi:10.1177/1471301214555542.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Harris MT, Rogers WA. Developing a Healthcare Technology Acceptance Model (H-TAM) for older adults with hypertension. Ageing Soc. 2021;43(4):814–34. doi:10.1017/S0144686X21001069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-principles and practices. Health Serv Res. 2013;48(6pt2):2134–56. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deterding NM, Waters MC. Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: a twenty-first-century approach. Sociol Methods Res. 2021;50(2):708–39. doi:10.1177/0049124118799377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ. Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int J Qual. 2017;16(1):1–13. doi:10.1177/1609406917733847.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berridge C, Wetle TF, Bowers BJ. Why older adults and their children disagree about in-home surveillance technology, sensors, and tracking. Gerontologist. 2020;60(5):926–34. doi:10.1093/geront/gnz068.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan N, Wong R, Desjardins AA, Munson S, Pierce J Monitoring pets, deterring intruders, and casually spying on neighbors: everyday uses of smart home cameras. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2022. doi:10.1145/3491102.3517617.
   Google Scholar
• Berridge C, Zhou Y, Lazar A, Porwal A, Mattek N, Gothard S, Kaye J Control matters in elder care technology: evidence and direction for designing it. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference; 2022. p. 1831–48. doi:10.1145/3532106.3533471.
   Google Scholar
• Berridge C. Breathing room in monitored space: the impact of passive monitoring technology on privacy in independent living. Gerontologist. 2016;56(5):807–16. doi:10.1093/geront/gnv034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hensel BK, Demiris G, Courtney KL. Defining obtrusiveness in home telehealth technologies: a conceptual framework. J Am Med Inform Assoc: JAMIA. 2006;13(4):428–31. doi:10.1197/jamia.M2026.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeder B, Chung J, Joe J, Lazar A, Thompson HJ, Demiris G Understanding older adults’ perceptions of in-home sensors using an obtrusiveness framework. International Conference on Augmented Cognition; 2016; Cham: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• FakhrHosseini S Do we need a new technology acceptance model? MIT AgeLab Blog; 2022. https://agelab.mit.edu/home-logistics-and-services/blog/do-we-need-new-technology-adoption-model/.
   Google Scholar
• Lyons KS, Lee CS. The theory of dyadic illness management. J Fam Nurs. 2018;24(1):8–28. doi:10.1177/1074840717745669.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shelton EG, Orsulic-Jeras S, Whitlatch CJ, Szabo SM. Does it matter if we disagree? The impact of incongruent care preferences on persons with dementia and their care partners. Gerontologist. 2018;58(3):556–66. doi:10.1093/geront/gnw202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mort M, Roberts C, Callén B. Ageing with telecare: care or coercion in austerity? Sociol Health Illn. 2013;35(6):799–812. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2012.01530.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ienca M, Wangmo T, Jotterand F, Kressig RW, Elger B. Ethical design of intelligent assistive technologies for dementia: a descriptive review. Sci Eng Ethics. 2018;24(4):1035–55. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9976-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meiland F, Innes A, Mountain G, Robinson L, van der Roest H, García-Casal JA, Gove D, Thyrian JR, Evans S, Droes R-M, et al. Technologies to support community-dwelling persons with dementia: a position paper on issues regarding development, usability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, deployment, and ethics. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;4(1):e1–e1. doi:10.2196/rehab.6376.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Novitzky P, Smeaton AF, Chen C, Irving K, Jacquemard T, O’Brolcháin F, O’Mathúna D, Gordijn B. A review of contemporary work on the ethics of ambient assisted living technologies for people with dementia. Sci Eng Ethics. 2015;21(3):707–65. doi:10.1007/s11948-014-9552-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berridge C, Turner NR, Liu L. Pilot study of a self-administered advance planning tool for technology use with dementia care dyads innovation in Aging. Innov Aging. 2022;6(Suppl 1):253. doi:10.1093/geroni/igac059.1002.
   Google Scholar