Exploring acceptance of monitoring technology in home‐based dementia care: A survey study among informal carers

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThere is growing interest to support home‐based dementia care via contactless monitoring technologies which do not require any body contact and allow informal carers to remotely monitor health and safety of people with dementia (PwD). However, sustainable implementation of such technologies requires a better understanding of informal carers’ acceptance. This study therefore aimed to explore 1) acceptance towards different use scenarios, 2) acceptance towards different contactless sensor types, and 3) differences between accepters and refusers of contactless monitoring technology for home‐based dementia care.MethodA cross‐sectional online survey was conducted among n = 304 informal carers of community‐dwelling PwD (Mage = 58.5±10.7; 71% female) in the Netherlands and Germany. Questions targeted informal carers’ general acceptance towards contactless monitoring technology, their acceptance towards 5 different use scenarios, their acceptance towards 7 different contactless sensor types, as well as their own and their care recipient’s personal characteristics. Data were examined using descriptive and bivariate analyses.ResultAcceptance towards different use scenarios for contactless monitoring technology varied significantly (p<.001). The intention to use contactless monitoring technology was highest for detecting emergency situations (e.g., falls, wandering), and lowest for predicting acute situations (e.g., fall prediction). Acceptance towards different contactless sensor types varied significantly as well (p<.001). RF‐based sensors (e.g radar) and light sensors were considered most acceptable, whereas camera‐based sensors and audio sensors were seen as least acceptable for home‐based dementia care. Lastly, accepters and refusers of contactless monitoring technology significantly differed regarding gender (p = .010), their relation with the PwD (p = .003), eHealth literacy (p = .025), personal innovativeness (p<.001), experience with safety technology (GPS trackers, alarm buttons) (p = .002), and the PwD’s type of cognitive impairment (p = .035) and housing situation (p = .023).ConclusionOur findings can help to make better‐informed decisions during development and implementation of contactless monitoring technology to support home‐based dementia care, thereby increasing the chance of achieving a fit between technology, user, and use context.