Age Action Alliance - a useful resource

I would like to draw attention to the Age Action Alliance, a network that resulted out of the European Year for Active Ageing.

The Age Action Alliance is a useful resource covering a wide range of topics and provides lists of organisations as well as reports.

I'm particularly interested in Digital inclusion.

Ofcom press release: Tablets help drive increase in older people going online

From the Ofcom press release:
"The number of people aged 65 and over accessing the internet has risen by more than a quarter in the past year, driven by a three-fold increase in the use of tablet computers to go online, new Ofcom research reveals.

This has helped to drive overall internet use up from 79% of adults in 2012 to 83% in 2013, according to Ofcom’s Adults’ Media Use and Attitudes Report.

The proportion of people aged over 65 that are accessing the web reached 42% in 2013, up nine percentage points from 33% in 2012, which is a 27% increase over the year. One reason for this is an increase in the use of tablet computers by older people aged 65-74 to go online, up from 5% in 2012 to 17% in 2013.

Nearly all adults under 35 years old now go online (98%). The increase in internet use was driven by three different age-groups: 25-34s (98%, up from 92% in 2012), 45-54s (91%, up from 84%), and, most notably, those over 65."

There are many reasons why tablets are supporting the "drive" to get older people online, for example:

• the touch interface makes it "easier" to use, than keyboard and mouse (or not)

Syed Murad, Michael Bradley, Neesha Kodagoda et al. (2012) Using task analysis to explore older novice participants’ experiences with a handheld touchscreen device, 524. In Contemporary Ergonomics and Human Factors 2012: Proceedings of the International.

Lim, F. S., Wallace, T., Luszcz, M. A., & Reynolds, K. J. (2013). Usability of tablet computers by people with early-stage dementia. Gerontology, 59(2), 174-182.

• the shape of the device is more inviting, aesthetically pleasing and easier to handle
• the operating systems are more smart phone like rather than PC like and potentially easier to handle (and more familiar to current users of smart phones)

Read the full press release here

Virtual smart house to showcase different Telecare options

The MI (More Independent) DALLAS project offers a link to a virtual smart house to showcase the different forms of Telehealth technologies that exist. I have recently been to the AKTIVE conference and already there it struck me how large and varied the range of Telehealth devices are. Going through this virtual smart house, it brings home again, that many of those technologies are useful for anyone of any age and health.
For example, the MagiPlug, which stops overflowing and indicates when the water temperature is too hot, should be useful for anyone who also has small children.
At the same time the 'Bath SPA Light Experience' are a nice to have, but I can't see the direct relevance to Telehealth apart from creating a nice and relaxing atmosphere. The selection of the technologies featured in the house may have been chosen with economical interests, nevertheless it promotes awareness of technologies around.
View virtual Telecare smart house 

Telecare in the UK - my summary from the AKTIVE conference

I have just been to the AKTIVE conference in Leeds. It was very insightful since it refreshed my knowledge about Telecare. I have always been careful not to have my research (Teletalker) placed into Telecare since I didn’t want to come directly from the health related angle. When I went to the ISG conference in 2012 in Eindhoven – the message was very clear: the acceptance rate of Telecare was very low, making pilot projects costly and - with a few exception - unsuccessful.

Now 2014 this is still the case, but at least researchers and other (steering parties) involved are coming around to understand that the components to achieve success with Telecare are complex, context dependent, nuanced and subtle. They realized that a truly multidisciplinary approach involving “end users” (patients, health personnel, carers and technicians) is needed to achieve the potential of Telecare.

A bit of back ground to Telecare or Telehealth as it’s also frequently referred to (based on this Eurohealth paper and other sources): 

Since 1998 UK and other European country governments – and later also the EU - have been pushing for ways to introduce technology to assist with the delivery of care. Europe is faced with the first time phenomenon of lots more older people than younger people because of longevity due to healthier living conditions and no wars, combined with a reduction in birth rates. By 2030 about a quarter of the European population will be over 65 years old, leaving Europe with a 'person to care for ratio' (or potential support ratio PSR, Clarkson & Coleman 2013) of 1:4, which has not existed before. Therefore the drive to use technology to assist and manage health care seems to be a logical step, so fewer people can look after more people. Numerous pilot projects have been taking place in the UK and in the EU, all with moderate success. The range of Telecare technologies range from “low tech” such as pill dispensers, to “more service related” such as pendants for fall alarms (if triggered a carer will contact you), to “high tech” devices and integrated systems such as smart houses equipped with sensors and video connectivity. 

The largest technology (and response) provider in the UK and Europe appears to be Tunstall. Difficulties in delivery Telecare successfully lies with several layers such as interoperability of the systems, technological failures, low awareness with professionals and patients, low acceptance rate (stigma), cost and disjointedness of services (Telecare is seen as an ‘bolt-on’ service).

The Technology Strategy Board has commissioned several projects (SALT, MALT, AKTIVE, ATHENE, COMODAL, COBALT), which are due to disseminate their findings in early summer 2014.

For example, COMODAL looked at reaching consumers in the electronic assisted living technology market. Dr Gillian Ward presented a talk about their work at AKTIVE event. They were interested in the 50-70s age group, either as consumer for themselves or for someone for someone they care for. They employed as methods: literature review, market analysis, product reviews, street surveys, industry telephone interview, focus groups and co-creation workshop. From the interviews with consumer and industry they found that there was a large mismatch between expectations on each side. Industry underestimated the concerns consumers have around perceptions of the use of technology. Cost is important but not the most crucial influence in the purchasing decision. People (consumers) were looking for managed solutions, not products. The design of Telecare should address aspirations, not disability.

Other themes of the conference addressed issues around measuring the performance of Telecare  and insight into the patient & carer relationship and the role of Telecare technology in there. The topic of loneliness and the multifold aspects around caring arrangements were brought out in the open. For example a neighbour would not mind being the first point of contact during day time, but not necessarily during night time. Rob Procter and Joe Wherton reviewed people’s adaptions to Telecare devices, which they termed “bricolage”. They called for more “co-production” in the shape of telecare devices i.e. where users can adapt / make the device to their needs. Paul Clitheroe from the MI-Health, Dallas project in Liverpool, suggested not to “talk” about telecare, but to reach people through activities they enjoy and to communicate the message of self-care. In his view, once people took on responsibility for their own health, people will look for solutions offered on the market in order to manage their health.

I thoroughly enjoyed the conference and the people I met. This little summary does not do justice to the full range of great projects and the wealth of knowledge that has been generated through the critical review of Telecare options and impact.

Themes that I felt were missing:

•  The delicate and problematic relationships between (informal) carers and older people in regards to abuse – can Telecare play a role in reducing abuse?
•  The issue of managing unpredictability in the caring circle, it may be that the carer  (the spouse) falls ill too … how quickly can the new carer get introduced to the telecare set-up?
• There was frequently a call to offer more choice to the patient or carer, but I can also see a danger in the “terror of choice”. Particularly when your mind is already occupied with other realizations that you have to come to terms with e.g. cancer, diabetes. In my view it’s not enough to talk about choice, but to consider where it is helpful to offer choice (e.g. it might be useful to offer a fall alarm either as pendant or wrist band) and when to intervene with a set plan based on professional experience.

 

Could the mixing of generations be a problem for Facebook?

With great interest I read the BBC news article about Facebook's 10th birthday. Of particular interest to me was this sentence: "Parents can be embarrassing on Facebook - they post pictures of their offspring that they find hilarious but their children don't, they add ill-advised comments to their children's status updates and they often fail to understand the basic etiquettes of online discourse."

During my research I found that there was a benefit at aiming towards transgenerational (i.e. acting across multiple generations) use of online social media. This article, I suspect, assumes the middle age parent and teenager relationship, but I wonder if it also holds true for the older parent and adult child relationship. 

My own mother is still not online, but my mother-in-law is, although not on Facebook. In so far, my husband and I are protected from any of these embarrassing moments of too much information sharing on Facebook.

I have a friend in her 30s and her mum is in her 50s and I’m able to see their activities on Facebook. To me their online exchange seems happy and full of banter and I hope it stays that way for the next 30 or more years.

Read full BBC article here

 

NAPA's useful list of links to activities / charities working with the oldest old

Thanks again to Jeremy from KIT: He made me aware of NAPA, which has a great page with external links to organisations working with the oldest old. For example I really liked what Jabadao does by getting people with dementia to dance.

see the page with links from NAPA

When do you call a metal arm on which an ipad can sit a robot?

From the Presence newsletter I received the news items labelled:

"The robot that doesn’t roam: KUBI ditches the wheels for stronger interaction".

But to my surprise when I followed the link to the Revolve Robotics website (the manufacturer of KUBI), it just showed a metal arm that is fixed to the location but very moveable.

This development of KUBI is interesting to me since I did appropriate existing software and devices for my Teletalker system too. To me it was obvious that Telepresence did not need wheels, when it's about connecting two static locations. But now I wonder, when do you actually call a device or a construction a robot?

Comments welcome.