Kathryn Peri1, Ngaire Kerse2, Elizabeth Broadbent3, Chandimal Jayawardena4, Tony Kuo4, Chandan Datta4, Rebecca Stafford3, Bruce MacDonald4. 1. School of Nursing, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. 2. Department of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. 3. Department of Psychological Medicine, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. 4. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Abstract
AIMS: To investigate whether robots could reduce resident sleeping and stimulate activity in the lounges of an older persons' care facility. METHODS: Non-randomised controlled trial over a 12-week period. The intervention involved situating robots in low-level and high-dependency ward lounges and a comparison with similar lounges without robots. A time sampling observation method was utilised to observe resident behaviour, including sleep and activities over periods of time, to compare interactions in robot and no robot lounges. RESULTS: The use of robots was modest; overall 13% of residents in robot lounges used the robot. Utilisation was higher in the low-level care lounges; on average, 23% used the robot, whereas in high-level care lounges, the television being on was the strongest predictor of sleep. CONCLUSION: This study found that having robots in lounges was mostly a positive experience. The amount of time residents slept during the day was significantly less in low-level care lounges that had a robot.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To investigate whether robots could reduce resident sleeping and stimulate activity in the lounges of an older persons' care facility. METHODS: Non-randomised controlled trial over a 12-week period. The intervention involved situating robots in low-level and high-dependency ward lounges and a comparison with similar lounges without robots. A time sampling observation method was utilised to observe resident behaviour, including sleep and activities over periods of time, to compare interactions in robot and no robot lounges. RESULTS: The use of robots was modest; overall 13% of residents in robot lounges used the robot. Utilisation was higher in the low-level care lounges; on average, 23% used the robot, whereas in high-level care lounges, the television being on was the strongest predictor of sleep. CONCLUSION: This study found that having robots in lounges was mostly a positive experience. The amount of time residents slept during the day was significantly less in low-level care lounges that had a robot.