Universal Access in the Information Society

, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp 235–242 | Cite as

Designing assistive technologies for medication regimes in care settings

  • K. Cheverst
  • K. Clarke
  • G. Dewsbury
  • T. Hemmings
  • S. Kember
  • T. Rodden
  • M. Rouncefield
Special issue on countering design exclusion

Abstract

This paper presents some early design work of the Care in the Digital Community research project begun under the EPSRC IRC Network project Equator. Gaining a comprehensive understanding of user requirements in care settings poses interesting methodological challenges. This paper details some methodological options for working in the domestic domain and documents the translation of research into design recommendations. We report on the importance of medication issues in a hostel for former psychiatric patients and present an early prototype of a medication manager designed to be sensitive to the particular requirements of the setting.

Keywords

Assistive technology Universal design Ubiquitous computing Ethnography 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Anderson R (1994) Representations and requirements: the value of ethnography in system design. Hum Comput Interaction 9:151 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bjørneby S (2000) ‘Smart houses’: can they really benefit older people? Signpost 5(2):pp 36-38 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cheverst K, Cobb S, Hemmings T, Kember S, Friday A, Phillips P, Procter R, Rodden T, Rouncefield M (2001) Design with care. EDRA32 2001, Workshop symposium on adding the user into the design of the home in the digital age, July 2001, Edinburgh Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clarkson PJ, Keates S (2001) A practical inclusive design approach. Proceedings of INCLUDE 2001, London, p 72 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dadong Wan (1999) Magic medicine cabinet: a situated portal for consumer healthcare. In: Proceedings of the first international symposium on handheld and ubiquitous computing (HUC ‘99), 27–29 September 1999, Karlsruhe, Germany, pp 352–355 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dewsbury G, Edge M (2001) Designing the home to meet the needs of tomorrow ...today: smart technology, health and well-being. Open House Int 26(2):33 http://www.smartthinking.ukideas.com/_OHI.pdf Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dewsbury G (2001) The social and psychological aspects of smart home technology within the care sector. New Technol Hum Services 14(1–2):9–18 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Edwards K, Grinter R (2001) At home with ubiquitous computing. Proceedings of UbiComp ‘01, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 263 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Feenberg A (1996) Marcuse or Habermas: two critiques of technology. Inquiry 39:57 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fisk M (2001) The implications of smart home technologies. In: Peace S, Holland C (eds) Inclusive housing in an ageing society. Polity Press, Bristol, UK, p 119 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gaver W (2001) The presence project. Computer Related Design Research Studio, RCA, London Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gaver W, Dunne A, Pacenti E (1999) Cultural probes. Interactions 6(1):21–29 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gaver W, Dunne A, Pacenti E (1999) Design: cultural probes. In: Interactions: new visions of human-computer interaction. ACM, Danvers, MA Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gitlin L (1995) Why older people accept or reject assistive technology. Generations 19(1):43 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hughes JA, King V, Rodden T, Andersen H (1994) Moving out from the control room: ethnography in system design. In: Proceedings of CSCW ‘94, Chapel Hill, NC Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hughes J, O’Brien J, Rodden T (1998) Understanding technology in domestic environments. Proceedings of CoBuild ‘98, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 248–261 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hughes J, O’Brien J, Rodden T, Rouncefield M, Viller S (2000) Patterns of home life: informing design for domestic environments. Personal Technol 4(1):25–38 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lupton D, Seymour W (2000) Technology, selfhood and physical disability. Social Sci Med 50:1852 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mateas M et al. (1996) Engineering ethnography in the home. Proceedings of CHI ‘96, ACM Press, Vancouver, pp 283–284 Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Microchip (2001) Microchip PIC 16F87X data sheet, 2001. (www.microchip.com) Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mynatt E, Rowan J, Jacobs A, Craighill S (2001) Digital family portraits: providing peace of mind for extended family members. In: Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘01), Seattle, ACM Press, New York, pp 333–340 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    O’Brien J, Hughes J, Rodden T, Rouncefield M (1999) At home with the technology. ACM Transactions on computer-human interaction 6(3):282–308 Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    O’Brien J, Rodden T (1997) Interactive systems in domestic environments. Proceedings of DIS ‘97, ACM Press, Amsterdam, pp 247–259 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Phillip H (2001) Charge transfer sensing. Quantum Research Group White Paper 2001. (www.qprox.com) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sacks H (1995) General introduction. In: Jefferson G (ed) Lectures on conversation, part VI, Fall 1967, Blackwell, Oxford, p 621 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sheaff R (1996) The need for healthcare. Routledge, London Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    The DIRC Project – http://www.dirc.org.uk/Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    The Equator Project – http://www.equator.ac.uk/. For greater detail on the construction of the medication manager, go to http://www.equator.ac.uk/digicare/Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tweed C, Quigley G (2000) The design and technological feasibility of home systems for the elderly. The Queens University, Belfast Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Venkatesh A (1996) Computers and other interactive technologies for the home. Communications of the ACM, 39(12)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Cheverst
    • 1
  • K. Clarke
    • 1
  • G. Dewsbury
    • 1
  • T. Hemmings
    • 2
  • S. Kember
    • 1
  • T. Rodden
    • 2
  • M. Rouncefield
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ComputingLancaster UniversityLancasterUK
  2. 2.The School of Computer Science and ITThe University of NottinghamNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations