66
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Autonomy, independence, and participation of nursing home habitants addressed by assistive technology: a scoping review

ORCID Icon, , ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Received 12 Dec 2023, Accepted 20 May 2024, Published online: 04 Jun 2024

References

  • Dramé M, Lang P-O, Barbe C, et al. Entrée dans la dépendance : comprendre pour agir. Les Cahiers De L’année Gérontologique. 2011;3(1):33.
  • World Health Organization. World report on ageing and health. World Health Organization; 2015b. 9789240694811_eng.pdf (who.int)
  • World Health Organization. WHOQOL - Measuring Quality of Life. 2012. https://www.who.int/tools/whoqol
  • Holup AA, Hyer K, Meng H, et al. Profile of nursing home residents admitted directly from home. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2017;18(2);131–137. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2016.08.017.
  • Onder G, Carpenter I, Finne-Soveri H, et al. Assessment of nursing home residents in Europe: the services and health for elderly in long TERm care (SHELTER) study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012; 12(1):1–10. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-5.
  • Sanford A, Orrell M, Tolson D, et al. An international definition for “nursing home”. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015. 16:181–184. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2014.12.013.
  • Direction de la Recherche, des Études et de l’Évaluation des Statistiques (DRESS), L’hébergement des personnes âgées en établissement Les chiffres clés. L’enquête auprès des établissements d’hébergements pour personnes âgées. 2015. https://drees.solidarites-sante.gouv.fr/sources-outils-et-enquetes/07-lenquete-aupres-des-etablissements-dhebergement-pour-personnes-agees.
  • McCabe M, Byers J, Busija L, et al. How important are choice, autonomy, and relationships in predicting the quality of life of nursing home residents? J Appl Gerontol. 2021;40(12):1743–1750. doi: 10.1177/0733464820983972.
  • European Commission. Long-term care report: trends, challenges, and opportunities in an ageing society. Vol. I. Publications Office of the European Union; 2021. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2767/677726
  • Miron de l’Espinay A, Roy D. Perte d’autonomie : À pratiques inchangées, 108 000 seniors de plus seraient attendus en ehpad d’ici à 2030 : projections de population âgée en perte d’autonomie selon le modèle lieux de vie et autonomie (LIVIA). Études et résultats. DREES. 2020;1172:1–5.
  • Ballard C, Orrell M, YongZhong S, et al. Impact of antipsychotic review and nonpharmacological intervention on antipsychotic use, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and mortality in people with dementia living in nursing homes: a factorial cluster-randomized controlled trial by the well-being and health for people with dementia (WHELD) program. AJP. 2016;173(3):252–262. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.15010130.
  • World Health Organization. Global strategy on people-centred and integrated health services : an overview of evidence. 2015a. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Global%20strategy%20on%20people-centred%20and%20integrated%20health%20services%3A%20An%20overview%20of%20evidence&publication_year=2015
  • Cordner Z, Blass DM, Rabins PV, et al. Quality of life in nursing home residents with advanced dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58(12):2394–2400., doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03170.x.
  • Drageset J, Eide GE, Ranhoff AH. Mortality in nursing home residents without cognitive impairment and its relation to self-reported health-related quality of life, sociodemographic factors, illness variables and cancer diagnosis: a 5-year follow-up study. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(2):317–325. doi: 10.1007/s11136-012-0143-5.
  • Şahin DS, Özer Ö, Yanardağ MZ. Perceived social support, quality of life and satisfaction with life in elderly people. Educ Gerontol. 2019;45(1):69–77. doi: 10.1080/03601277.2019.1585065.
  • Barkay A, Tabak N. Elderly residents’ participation and autonomy within a geriatric ward in a public institution. Int J Nurs Pract. 2002;8(4):198–209. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-172X.2002.00363.x.
  • Davies S, Laker S, Ellis L. Promoting autonomy and independence for older people within nursing practice: a literature review. J Adv Nurs. 1997;26(2):408–417. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.1997026408.x.
  • Kane RL, Rockwood T, Hyer K, et al. Rating the importance of nursing home residents’ quality of life. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(12):2076–2082. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.00493.x.
  • Knight T, Ricciardelli LA. Successful aging: perceptions of adults aged between 70 and 101 years. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2003;56(3):223–245. doi: 10.2190/CG1A-4Y73-WEW8-44QY.
  • Shippee TP. On the edge: balancing health, participation, and autonomy to maintain active independent living in two retirement facilities. J Aging Stud. 2012;26(1):1–15. doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2011.05.002.
  • Hedman M, Pöder U, Mamhidir A-G, et al. Life memories and the ability to act: the meaning of autonomy and participation for older people when living with chronic illness. Scand J Caring Sci. 2015; 29(4), 824–833. doi: 10.1111/scs.12215.
  • Heide SK. Autonomy, identity and health: defining quality of life in older age. J Med Ethics. 2022;48(5), 353–356. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-107185.
  • Paque K, Goossens K, Elseviers M, et al. Autonomy and social functioning of recently admitted nursing home residents. Aging & Mental Health. 2017;21(9), 910–916. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2016.1181711.
  • Welford C, Murphy K, Rodgers V, et al. Autonomy for older people in residential care: a selective literature review: autonomy for older people in residential care. Int J Older People Nurs. 2012;7(1):65–69. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-3743.2012.00311.x.
  • Moilanen T, Kangasniemi M, Papinaho O, et al. Older people’s perceived autonomy in residential care : an integrative review. Nurs Ethics. 2021;28(3):414–434. doi: 10.1177/0969733020948115.
  • Ahlin Marceta J. A non-ideal authenticity-based conceptualization of personal autonomy. Med Health Care Philos. 2019;22(3):387–395. doi: 10.1007/s11019-018-9879-1.
  • Bonikowsky S, Musto A, Suteu K, et al. Independence: an analysis of a complex and core construct in occupational therapy. Br J Occupat Therapy. 2012;75(4):188–195. doi: 10.4276/030802212X13336366278176.
  • Piškur B, Daniëls R, Jongmans MJ, et al. Participation and social participation : are they distinct concepts? Clin Rehabil. 2014;28(3):211–220. doi: 10.1177/0269215513499029.
  • World Health Organization. International Classification… Google Scholar. Consulté 14 novembre 2023, à l’adresse. 2013. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=International+Classification+of+Functioning%2C+Disability+and+Health&publication_year=2001.
  • Fisher A, Marterella A. Powerful practice: a model for authentic occupational therapy. Centre for innovative OT solutions; Fort Collins; 2019.
  • Aquino J, Bourquin M. Les innovations numériques et technologiques dans les établissements et services pour personnes âgées. 2019. Filière Silver Economie.
  • Camp N, Lewis M, Hunter K, et al. Technology used to recognize activities of daily living in community-dwelling older adults. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(163):1–18. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18010163.
  • Demiris G, Skubic M, Rantz MJ, et al. Facilitating interdisciplinary design specification of “smart” homes for aging. In Ubiquity : Technologies for Better Health in Aging Societies. 2006. IOS Press, Vol. 124, p. 45.
  • Ecarnot F, Sanchez S, Berrut G, et al. Defining Your “Life Territory” : The Meaning of Place and Home for Community Dwellers and Nursing Home Residents—A Qualitative Study in Four European Countries. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(1), 157:1–10. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19010517.
  • Kenigsberg P-A, Aquino J-P, Bérard A, et al. Assistive technologies to address capabilities of people with dementia: from research to practice. Dementia. 2019;18(4), 1568–1595. doi: 10.1177/1471301217714093.
  • Krick T, Huter K, Domhoff D, et al. Digital technology and nursing care: a scoping review on acceptance, effectiveness and efficiency studies of informal and formal care technologies. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):1–15. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4238-3.
  • Daly Lynn J, Rondón-Sulbarán J, Quinn E, et al. A systematic review of electronic assistive technology within supporting living environments for people with dementia. Dementia (London). 2019;18(7-8):2371–2435. doi: 10.1177/1471301217733649.
  • Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–473. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850.
  • Hong Q, Pluye P, Fabregues S, et al. Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018. Registration of Copyright (#1148552), Canadian Intellectual Property Office, Industry Canada. 2018.
  • Schlomann A, Seifert A, Zank S, et al. Use of information and communication technology (ICT) devices among the oldest-old: loneliness, anomie, and autonomy. Innov Aging. 2020;4(2):1–10. doi: 10.1093/geroni/igz050.
  • Niemeijer AR, Depla MF, Frederiks BJ, et al. The experiences of people with dementia and intellectual disabilities with surveillance technologies in residential care. Nurs Ethics. 2015;22(3):307–320. doi: 10.1177/0969733014533237.
  • Buss S, Westlund A. Personal autonomy. In: Edward N. Zalta, editor. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2018. (Spring Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/personal-autonomy/
  • Hall A, Brown Wilson C, Stanmore E, et al. Moving beyond « safety » versus ‘autonomy’: a qualitative exploration of the ethics of using monitoring technologies in long-term dementia care. BMC Geriatrics. 2019;19(1), 145:1–13. doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1155-6.
  • Niemeijer AR, Depla M, Frederiks B, et al. The use of surveillance technology in residential facilities for people with dementia or intellectual disabilities: a study among nurses and support staff. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(12):28–37. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000457408.38222.d0.
  • Aloulou Mokhtari M, Tiberghien T, Biswas J, et al. Deployment of assistive living technology in a nursing home environment: methods and lessons learned. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13:42; 1–17. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-42.
  • Bradwell HL, Edwards KJ, Baines R, et al. Facial recognition lock technology for social care settings: a qualitative evaluation of implementation of facial recognition locks at two residential care sites. Front Digit Health. 2023;5:1–12. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1066327.
  • Dorsten AM, Sifford KS, Bharucha A, et al. Ethical perspectives on emerging assistive technologies: insights from focus groups with stakeholders in long-term care facilities. J Empir Res Human Res Ethics. 2009;4(1):25–36. doi: 10.1525/jer.2009.4.1.25.
  • Gullsett MK, Nilsen ER, Dugstad J. Next of kin’s experiences with and attitudes towards digital monitoring technology for ageing people with dementia in residential care facilities. A qualitative study based on the voices of next of kin and care providers. Scand J Caring Sci. 2022. Gullslett; 36(4):1094–103. doi: 10.1111/scs.13009.
  • Hung L, Mann J, Perry J, et al. Technological risks and ethical implications of using robots in long-term care. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng. 2022;9:1–10. doi: 10.1177/20556683221106917.
  • Sallinen M, Hentonen O, Teeri S. Ethical dilemmas related to the use of safety technology in service house environments. Scand J Caring Sci. 2020;34(1):199–205. doi: 10.1111/scs.12721.
  • Neimejer AR, Depla MFIA, Frederiks BJM, et al. The experiences of people with dementia and intellectual disabilities with surveillance technologies in residential care. Nurs Ethics. 2015;22(3):307–20.
  • Obayashi K, Kodate N, Masuyama S. Measuring the impact of age, gender and dementia on communication-robot interventions in residential care homes. Geriatr Gerontol Int.. 2020;20(4):373–8.
  • Hoel V, Seibert K, Domhoff D, et al. Social health among german nursing home residents with dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the role of technology to promote social participation. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(4):1956. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19041956.
  • Tak SH, Beck C, Hong SH. Feasibility of providing computer activities for nursing home residents with dementia. Non Pharmacol Ther Dement. 2013; 3:1–10.
  • Sapci AH, Sapci HA. Innovative assisted living tools, remote monitoring technologies, artificial Intelligence-Driven solutions, and robotic systems for aging societies: systematic review. JMIR Aging. 2019;2(2):e15429. doi: 10.2196/15429.
  • Luijkx K, Peek S, Wouters E. “Grandma, you should do It—it’s cool” older adults and the role of family members in their acceptance of technology. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015;12(12):15470–15485. doi: 10.3390/ijerph121214999.
  • Portz JD, Fruhauf C, Bull S, et al. “Call a teenager… that’s what I do!” - Grandchildren help older adults use new technologies: qualitative study. JMIR Aging. 2019;2(1):e13713. doi: 10.2196/13713.
  • Wang J, Fu Y, Lou V, et al. A systematic review of factors influencing attitudes towards and intention to use the long-distance caregiving technologies for older adults. Int J Med Inform. 2021;153:104536. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104536.
  • Guner H, Acarturk C. The use and acceptance of ICT by senior citizens: a comparison of technology acceptance model (TAM) for elderly and young adults. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2020;19(2):311–330. doi: 10.1007/s10209-018-0642-4.
  • Zander V, Gustafsson C, Landerdahl Stridsberg S, et al. Implementation of welfare technology: a systematic review of barriers and facilitators. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2023;18(6):1–16. doi: 10.1080/17483107.2021.1938707.
  • Marangunić N, Granić A. Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2015;14(1):81–95. doi: 10.1007/s10209-014-0348-1.
  • Vargas C, Whelan J, Brimblecombe J, et al. Co-creation, co-design, co-production for public health – a perspective on definition and distinctions. Public Health Res Pract. 2022;32(2):1–7. doi: 10.17061/phrp3222211.
  • Kip H, Keizer J, da Silva MC, et al. Methods for human-Centered eHealth development: narrative scoping review. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24(1):e31858. doi: 10.2196/31858.
  • Ryan RM, Deci EL. On happiness and human potentials: a review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52(1):141–166. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141.
  • Macdonald M, Yu Z, Weeks LE, et al. Assistive technologies that support social interaction in long-term care homes: a scoping review. JBI Evidence Synthesis. 2021;19(10):2695–2738. doi: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00264.
  • Budak KB, Atefi G, Hoel V, et al. Can technology impact loneliness in dementia? a scoping review on the role of assistive technologies in delivering psychosocial interventions in long-term care. Disabil Rehabil: Assist Technol. 2023;18(7):1107–19. doi: 10.1080/17483107.2021.1984594.
  • Brims L, Oliver K. Effectiveness of assistive technology in improving the safety of people with dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aging Ment Health. 2019;23(8):942–951. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2018.1455805.
  • Wilson DJ, Mitchell JM, Kemp BJ, et al. Effects of assistive technology on functional decline in people aging with a disability. Assist Technol. 2009;21(4):208–217. doi: 10.1080/10400430903246068.
  • Malatji WR, Eck RV, Zuva T. Understanding the usage, modifications, limitations and criticisms of technology acceptance model (TAM). Adv Sci Technol Eng Syst J. 2020;5(6):113–7. https://astesj.com/v05/i06/p12/.
  • Almasi S, Bahaadinbeigy K, Ahmadi H, et al. Usability evaluation of dashboards: a systematic literature review of tools. Biomed Res Int. 2023;1–11. doi: 10.1155/2023/9990933.
  • Pagé I, Roos M, Collin O, et al. UTAUT2-based questionnaire: cross-cultural adaptation to Canadian french. Disabil Rehabil. 2022;45(4):709–716. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2022.2037746.
  • Malatji WR, Eck RV, Zuva T. Understanding the usage, modifications, limitations and criticisms of technology acceptance model (TAM). Adv Sci Technol Eng Syst j. 2020;5(6):113–117. doi: 10.25046/aj050612.
  • Borgnis F, Desideri L, Converti RM, et al. Available assistive technology outcome measures: systematic review. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2023;10(1):e51124. doi: 10.2196/51124.
  • Salatino C, Pigini L, Andrich R. 2018. How to measure the impact of assistive technology solutions on the person’s quality of life? Proceedings of the 4th EAI. International Conference on Smart Objects and Technologies for Social Good, 238–242. doi: 10.1145/3284869.3284910.
  • Peetoom KKB, Lexis MAS, Joore M, et al. Literature review on monitoring technologies and their outcomes in independently living elderly people. Disabil Rehabil: Assist Technol. 2014;10(4):271–294. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2014.961179.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.