Advertisement

Les cahiers de l'année gérontologique

, Volume 4, Issue 4, pp 386–393 | Cite as

Le laboratoire LUSAGE : un exemple de Living Lab dans le domaine des gérontechnologies

  • M. Pino
  • V. Cristancho-Lacroix
  • H. Kerhervé
  • M. Boulay
  • G. Legouverneur
  • Y.-H. Wu
  • S. Damnée
  • H. Lenoir
  • A.-S. Rigaud
Article de Synthèse / Review Article

Résumé

Une variété de produits et services technologiques visent à répondre aux besoins de santé, d’autonomie et de sécurité des personnes âgées. Le Living Lab est une approche qui encourage la conception et le développement de solutions technologiques innovantes dans un processus de cocréation impliquant les utilisateurs et toutes les autres parties prenantes. Cet article présente l’apport de la méthodologie du Living Lab dans le développement de gérontechnologies en s’appuyant sur le cas du laboratoire LUSAGE, structure spécialisée dans la prise en charge des personnes âgées souffrant des troubles cognitifs et leurs aidants.

Mots-clés

Gérontechnologie Living Lab Usagers Cocréation Innovation 

LUSAGE: an example of Living Lab in the gerontechnology field

Abstract

A variety of technology-based products and services are designed to meet the needs of older adults in regard to healthcare, safety and autonomy. The Living Lab is an approach promoting the design and development of innovative technological solutions in a co-creation process which involves users and all other stakeholders. This paper presents the contribution of Living Lab methodology to the development of solutions in the field of gerontechnology by focusing on the case of the LUSAGE laboratory that specifically targets elderly people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers.

Keywords

Gerontechnology Living Lab Users Co-creation Innovation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Références

  1. 1.
    Preiser W, Ostroff E (2001) Universal Design Handbook (1re éd.). McGraw-Hill Professional, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rigaud AS, Pino M, Wu YH, et al (2011) Support for patients with Alzheimer’s disease and their caregivers by gerontechnology. Geriatr Psychol Neuropsychiatr Vieil 9:91–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fisk AD, Rogers WA, Charness N, et al (2009) Designing for Older Adults: Principles and Creative Human Factors Approaches (2e éd.) CRC Press, BocaRatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    LoPresti E, Bodine C, Lewis C (2008) Assistive technology for cognition. Understanding the Needs of Persons with Disabilities. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 27:29–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Michaud F, Boissy P, Corriveau H, et al (2007) Telepresence robot for home care assistance. AAAI Spring Symposium on Multidisciplinary Collaboration for Socially Assistive Robotics, Palo Alto, USAGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McCreadi C, Tinker A (2005) The acceptability of assistive technology to older people. Ageing Soc 25:91–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wessels R, Dijcks B, Soede M, et al (2003) Non-use of provided assistive technology devices, a literature overview. Technol Disabil 15:231–8Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eriksson M, Niitamo VP, Kulkki S (2005) State-of-the-art in utilizing Living Labs approach to user-centric ICT innovation-a European approach. Lulea: Center for Distance-spanning Technology. Lulea University of Technology Sweden: LuleaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schumacher J, Feurstein K (2007) Living Labs — the user as co-creator. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising, June 2007, Sophia-Antipolis, FranceGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kusiak A (2007) Innovation: The living laboratory perspective. Computer-Aided Design and Applications 4:863–76Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bergvall-Kareborn B, Hoist M, Stahlbrost A (2009) Concept design with a Living Lab approach. System Sciences. HICSS 09:1–10Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Picard R (2010) Usage des TIC par les patients et les citoyens en situation de fragilité dans leurs lieux de vie. Rapport du Conseil Général de l’Industrie, de l’énergie et des technologies (CGIET. N° 2010/46/CGIET/SG)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pino M, Faucounau V, Wu YH, et al (2009) The LUSAGE Usability laboratory for elderly people with cognitive impairment. Gerontechnology 8:185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rubin J, Chisnell D (2008) Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests (2e éd.). John Wiley & Sons Ltd, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    van der Roest HG (2009) Care needs in dementia and digital interactive information provisioning. VU University Medical Centre, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lazar J, Feng, DJH, Hochheiser DH (2009) Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., GlasgowGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Faucounau V, Wu Y, Boulay M, et al (2009) Caregivers’ requirements for in-home robotic agent for supporting community-living elderly subjects with cognitive impairment. Technol Health Care 17:33–40PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wu YH, Faucounau V, Boulay M, et al (2010) Robotic agents for supporting community-dwelling elderly people with memory complaints: Perceived needs and preferences. Health Informatics J 17:33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    International Standard Organization (1997) ISO 9241: Ergonomics Requirements for Office Work with Visual Display Terminal (VDT)-Parts 1-17Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cristancho-Lacroix V, Kerhervé H, Pino M, et al (2011) Usability assessment of a psycho-educational website for Alzheimer’s disease caregivers. Alzheimers Dement 7:S430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    de Sant’Anna M, Morat B, Rigaud AS (2012) Adaptabilité du robot Paro dans la prise en charge de la maladie d’Alzheimer séveèe de patients institutionnalisés. NPG, 12:43–8Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rialle V (2007) Technologies nouvelles susceptibles d’améliorer les pratiques gérontologiques et la vie quotidienne des malades âgés et de leur famille. Rapport pour Philippe Bas, Ministre de la Santé et des Solidarités. En ligne: http://www.travail-emploisante.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/rapport.technologies_nouvelles.pdf
  23. 23.
    Alzheimer Europe (2010) Alzheimer Europe Report. The Ethical Issues Linked to the Use of Assistive Technology in Dementia Care. Alzheimer Europe, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lauriks S, Reinersmann A, Van der Roest HG, et al (2007) Review of ICT-based services for identified unmet needs in people with dementia. Ageing Res Rev 6:223–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Faucounau V, Riguet M, Orvoen G, et al (2009) Electronic tracking system and wandering in Alzheimer’s disease: A case study. Ann. Phys. Rehabil. Med 52:579–87PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Pino
    • 1
    • 2
  • V. Cristancho-Lacroix
    • 1
    • 2
  • H. Kerhervé
    • 1
    • 2
  • M. Boulay
    • 1
    • 2
  • G. Legouverneur
    • 1
    • 2
  • Y.-H. Wu
    • 1
    • 2
  • S. Damnée
    • 1
    • 2
  • H. Lenoir
    • 1
    • 2
  • A.-S. Rigaud
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.LUSAGE Living Lab, hôpital Broca, GH Cochin-Broca-Hôtel-DieuAssistance publique-hôpitaux de ParisParisFrance
  2. 2.EA 4468université Paris Descartes, UFR de médecineParisFrance

Personalised recommendations