Advertisement

Understanding Older Adults’ Perceptions of In-Home Sensors Using an Obtrusiveness Framework

  • Blaine ReederEmail author
  • Jane Chung
  • Jonathan Joe
  • Amanda Lazar
  • Hilaire J. Thompson
  • George Demiris
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9744)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine if dimensions and sub-categories of a previously-tested obtrusiveness framework were represented in interviews conducted with community-dwelling older adults at three- and six-month study visits during an in-home sensor study. Secondary analysis of interviews was performed using a codebook based on an obtrusiveness framework. Eight community-dwelling older adults aged 79–86 participated in 15 interviews. One participant died between the three- and six-month interviews. Some elements of the obtrusiveness framework were present at three months but not at six months, indicating that perceptions of obtrusiveness of in-home sensors may decline over time. Findings highlight the importance of privacy issues and perceived usefulness for sensor technology use and adoption. There is a need to develop an obtrusiveness assessment instrument that enables nuanced measurements based on specific contexts and types of technologies.

Keywords

Sensors Obtrusiveness Technology acceptance Older adults Aging 

References

  1. 1.
    Reeder, B., Chung, J., Stevens-Lapsley, J.: Current telerehabilitation research with older adults at home: an integrative review. J. Gerontological Nurs. (In press)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13, 319–340 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kang, H.G., Mahoney, D.F., Hoenig, H., Hirth, V.A., Bonato, P., Hajjar, I., Lipsitz, L.A.: In situ monitoring of health in older adults: technologies and issues. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 58, 1579–1586 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    United States Federal Interagency Forum on Aging-Related Statistics: Older Americans 2010: Key Indicators of Well-Being. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zaslavsky, O., Cochrane, B.B., Herting, J.R., Thompson, H.J., Woods, N.F., Lacroix, A.: Application of person-centered analytic methodology in longitudinal research: exemplars from the Women’s Health Initiative Clinical Trial data. Res. Nurs. Health 37, 53–64 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caine, K.E., Fisk, A.D., Rogers, W.A.: Benefits and privacy concerns of a home equipped with a visual sensing system: A perspective from older adults. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 50, pp. 180–184. Sage Publications (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Le, T., Chaudhuri, S., White, C., Thompson, H., Demiris, G.: Trust in health information sources differs between young/middle and oldest old. Am. J. Health Promot. AJHP 28, 239–241 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hensel, B.K., Demiris, G., Courtney, K.L.: Defining obtrusiveness in home telehealth technologies a conceptual framework. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 13, 428–431 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Daniel, K.M., Cason, C.L., Ferrell, S.: Emerging technologies to enhance the safety of older people in their homes. Geriatr. Nurs. 30, 384–389 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Courtney, K.L., Demiris, G., Hensel, B.K.: Obtrusiveness of information-based assistive technologies as perceived by older adults in residential care facilities: A secondary analysis. Med. Inf. Internet Med. 32, 241–249 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Demiris, G., Rantz, M.J., Aud, M.A., Marek, K.D., Tyrer, H.W., Skubic, M., Hussam, A.A.: Older adults’ attitudes towards and perceptions of ‘smart home’ technologies: a pilot study. Inf. Health Soc. Care 29, 87–94 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Courtney, K.L.: Privacy and senior willingness to adopt smart home information technology in residential care facilities. Methods Inf. Med. 47, 76–81 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Meulendijk, M., Van De Wijngaert, L., Brinkkemper, S., Leenstra, H.: Am I in good care? Developing design principles for ambient intelligent domotics for elderly. Inf. Health Soc. Care 36, 75–88 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Demiris, G.: Privacy and social implications of distinct sensing approaches to implementing smart homes for older adults. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2009, EMBC 2009, Annual International Conference of the IEEE, pp. 4311–4314. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reeder, B., Chung, J., Lazar, A., Joe, J., Demiris, G., Thompson, H.J.: Testing a theory-based mobility monitoring protocol using in-home sensors: a feasibility study. Res. Gerontol Nurs. 6, 253–263 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Borson, S., Scanlan, J., Brush, M., Vitaliano, P., Dokmak, A.: The mini-cog: a cognitive ‘vital signs’ measure for dementia screening in multi-lingual elderly. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 15, 1021–1027 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Boyatzis, R.E.: Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    O’Reilly, M., Parker, N.: ‘Unsatisfactory Saturation’: a critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research. Qual. Res. 13, 190–197 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guest, G., Bunce, A., Johnson, L.: How many interviews are enough? Field Methods 18, 59–82 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Francis, J.J., Johnston, M., Robertson, C., Glidewell, L., Entwistle, V., Eccles, M.P., Grimshaw, J.M.: What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies. Psychol. Health 25, 1229–1245 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Demiris, G., Speedie, S.M., Finkelstein, S.: Change of patients’ perceptions of TeleHomeCare. Telemed. J. e-Health 7, 241–248 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reeder, B., Meyer, E., Lazar, A., Chaudhuri, S., Thompson, H.J., Demiris, G.: Framing the evidence for health smart homes and home-based consumer health technologies as a public health intervention for independent aging: A systematic review. Int. J. Med. Inf. 82, 565–579 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Blaine Reeder
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jane Chung
    • 2
  • Jonathan Joe
    • 3
  • Amanda Lazar
    • 3
  • Hilaire J. Thompson
    • 3
  • George Demiris
    • 3
  1. 1.University of Colorado Anschutz Medical CampusAuroraUSA
  2. 2.University of New MexicoAlbuquerqueUSA
  3. 3.University of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations