| Literature DB >> 28208620 |
Zhihua Wang1,2, Zhaochu Yang3, Tao Dong4.
Abstract
Rapid growth of the aged population has caused an immense increase in the demand for healthcare services. Generally, the elderly are more prone to health problems compared to other age groups. With effective monitoring and alarm systems, the adverse effects of unpredictable events such as sudden illnesses, falls, and so on can be ameliorated to some extent. Recently, advances in wearable and sensor technologies have improved the prospects of these service systems for assisting elderly people. In this article, we review state-of-the-art wearable technologies that can be used for elderly care. These technologies are categorized into three types: indoor positioning, activity recognition and real time vital sign monitoring. Positioning is the process of accurate localization and is particularly important for elderly people so that they can be found in a timely manner. Activity recognition not only helps ensure that sudden events (e.g., falls) will raise alarms but also functions as a feasible way to guide people's activities so that they avoid dangerous behaviors. Since most elderly people suffer from age-related problems, some vital signs that can be monitored comfortably and continuously via existing techniques are also summarized. Finally, we discussed a series of considerations and future trends with regard to the construction of "smart clothing" system.Entities:
Keywords: elderly care; human activity recognition; indoor positioning; vital sign monitoring; wearable technologies
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28208620 PMCID: PMC5336038 DOI: 10.3390/s17020341
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Schematic of functions for elderly care, including precise indoor positioning, physical activity tracking and real-time monitoring of vital signs.
Figure 2Indoor positioning technologies categorized by Mautz [33].
Comparison of indoor positioning technologies.
| Technology | Measurement Methods | Suitable Environment | Accuracy | Extra Device on User-side | Power Consumption | Cost | Advantages | Disadvantages | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A-GPS 1 | TTFF 2 | Outdoor and Indoor | 5–10 m | No | High | Low | Reuse sensors embedded in smartphone or smartwatch; cover entire earth. | Low security; occupy channel resource. | Google Earth; Baidu Maps |
| GSM (cellular) | RSS 3 | Outdoor and indoor | 10–50 m | No | Low | Low | Free of same-frequency interference; reuse sensors embedded in smartphone or smartwatch [ | Low reliability [ | Google Maps |
| RFID | Proximity; RSS | Indoor | 1–3 m | Yes | Low | Moderate | Moderate cost; high accuracy. | Tags lack communications capabilities; positioning coverage is limitted; extral devices. | Cricket (MIT) [ |
| WiFi | RSS | Indoor | 1–5 m | No | High | Low | Reuse existing infrastructure; low infrastructure cost. | Fingerprinting systems recalculation [ | Nibble [ |
| UWB | ToA; TDOA | Indoor | 6–10 cm | Yes | Low | High | Excellent accuracy; effectively passing through obstacles. | High cost; short range; problem in non-Line of Sight. | Ubisense; Dart UWB(Zebra). |
| Dead Reckoning | Tracking | Indoor or Outdoor | 1–5 m | No | High | Low | No additional hardware such as beacons. | Low accuracy. | / |
| Infrared | Proximity; Differential Phase-shift; AoA 4. | Indoor | 1–2 m | Yes | Low | Moderate | Low power consumption. | Short rang; cost for extra hardware. | IR.Loc (Ambiplex) [ |
| BLE Beacon | Proximity; RSS | Indoor and Semi-outdoor | 1–5 m | No | Low | Low | Low infrustructure cost; low power consumption. | Limitation in user mobility; low accuracy. | Shopstic (App). |
| Acoustic Signal | ToA; TDOA | Indoor | 0.03–0.8 m | No | Low | Moderate | No requirement for line of sight (LOS); does not interfere with electromagnetic waves [ | Cannot penetrate solid walls; loss of signal due to obstruction; false signals because of reflections [ | Active Bat; Sonitor IPS. |
| ZigBee | RSS | Indoor | 1–10 m | No | Low | Low | Low infrastructure cost; | Short range | Best Beacon Match [ |
| Visible Light | ToA; TdoA 5. | Indoor | 0.01–0.1 m | Yes | Low | High | Dual use of lighting infrastructure; | Needs to replace existing lights to LEDs 6 (dual use); | Bytelight; |
| Image-Based IPS | Pattern recognition | Indoor | 0.01–1 m | No | High | Moderate | Relatively cheap compared with technologies such as UWB. | Requires LOS, coverage is limited | Sky-Trax; |
| Geomagnetism-based IPS | Maps matching | Indoor and Outdoor | 0.1–2 m | No | Low | Low | No requirement of the maintenance (reusing existing device); | Interference by environment magnetic fields. | IndoorAtlas (University of Oulu) |
1 A-GPS: Assisted GPS [34]; 2 TTFF: time-to-first-fix [35]; 3 RSS: received signal strength; 4 AoA: angle of arrival; 5 ToA: time of arrival; TDoA: time difference of arrival; 6 LED: light-emitting diode.
Summary of requirements for the elderly care system.
| Criterion | Description | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | 2D position compared to reference | 0.5–1 m |
| Installation complexity | The time to install an IPS in a flat | <1 h |
| User acceptance | A qualitative measure of invasiveness | Non-invasive |
| Coverage | Area of a typical living flat | 90 m2 |
| Update rate | The sampling interval of an IPS | 0.5 s |
| Operating time | The battery life | Not assessed |
| Availability | The time that a system is active and responsive | >90% |
Figure 3Categorizations of HAR systems.
Figure 4Typical flowchart of a HAR system.
Figure 5Graphical demonstration of sensor placement.
Summary of research on sensor placement for HAR.
| Sensor | Location | Activities | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gyroscope Accelerometer | Wrist, hip, neck, knee cap | Wing Tsun movements | Heinz et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Ankle, thigh, hip, wrist, chest | Typing, talking, riding, walking, arm movement, etc. (20 activities) | Bao et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Thigh, Necklace, Wrists. | Falling backward, falling forward, chest pain, headache, vomiting, and fainting and a normal activity walking | Pirttikangas et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Waist. | Walking, running, scrubbing, standing, working at a PC, vacuuming, brushing teeth, sitting. | Yang et al. [ |
| Accelerometer, Gyroscope | Lower arm, Hip, Thigh, Wrist | Walking downstairs, walking upstairs, walking, jogging, biking, sitting and standing. | Shoaib et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Thigh | Walking, jogging, ascending stairs, descending stairs, sitting, standing. | Kwapisz et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Lower Back. | Lying, sitting, standing, working. on a computer, walking, running, cycling. | Bonomi et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Hip, wrist, arm, ankle, thigh | Lying, sitting, standing, walking, stair climbing, running, cycling. | Mannini et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; gyroscope | Upper arm, thigh | Slow walking, normal walking, brisk walking, jogging, sitting, ascending and descending stairs normally or briskly | Wu et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Chest, thigh, ankle. | Stairs ascent and descent, walking, sitting, standing up, sitting on the ground | Chamroukhi et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Chest, thigh, ankle. | 16 daily living activities. | Moncada-Torres, et al. [ |
| Accelerometer gyroscope | Thigh | Walking, walking upstairs, walking downstairs, sitting, standing, and lying down | Ronao et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; Gyroscope; Barometric pressure sensors. | Wrist; ankle; chest | Walking, running, stair descending and ascending, standing, sitting, lying down, brushing teeth, drinking, cutting food, writing, peeling carrot, eating butter bread, etc. | Moncada-Torres, et al. [ |
Summary of features for pre-processing [77].
| Group | Method |
|---|---|
| Time domain | Mean, median, standard deviation, variance, minimum, maximum, range, root mean square (RMS), correction, cross-correlation, entropy, and kurtosis, skewness, peak to peak, crest factor [ |
| Frequency domain | Fourier transform (FT), coefficients sum, dominant frequency, spectral energy, peak frequency, information entropy, entropy spectrum, spectral analysis of key coefficients, frequency range power (FRP) [ |
State of the art of human activity classification systems.
| Sensors | Placement | Features | Classifiers | Participants | Activities | Accuracy (%) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accelerometer | Upper arm, lower arm, hip, thigh, foot | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | KNN; Decision tree; NB. | 20 | 6 | 52–84 | Bao. et al. [ |
| Gyroscope | Shank | Frequency-domain | Other | 20 | 1 | 97 | Coley et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; gyroscope. | Wrist; lower leg; foot; neck; hip. | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | Decision tree; KNN; NB. | 2 | 20 | NA 1 | Heinz et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Wrist; hip; necklace | Time-domain | C4.5 2 | 6 | 6 | About 75 | Muurer et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Lower back | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | Decision tree | 20 | 20 | 93 | Bonomi et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; gyroscope. | Chest, thigh | Time-domain | User-defined | 1 | 4 | 91 | Li et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Wrist; lower arm; knee; ankle. | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | NB, GMM, SVM, NV, C4.5 | 20 | 20 | 92.2–98.5 | Mannini et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Thigh | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | C4.5, MLP 3, LR 4 | 29 | 6 | 78.1–95.7 | Kwapisz et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; gyroscope | Arm, thigh. | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | KNN; C4.5; NB, etc. | 16 | 13 | 63.2–90.2 | Wu et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; gyroscope | Lower arm | Time-domain | RBM 5 | 12 | NA | 72.1 | Bhattacharya et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; gyroscope | Wrist | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | HF-SVM 6 | 30 | 6 | 89 | Anguita et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Lower back | Time-domain | Decision tree | 24 | 4 | 96.61 | Khan et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; gyroscope; barometric pressure sensors | Ankle; wrist; chest | Time-domain; frequency-domain | KNN | 6 | 16 | 93–95 | Moncada-Torres et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Wrist | Time-domain; frequency-domain | NB; SVM; Decision tree; KNN | 2 | 8 | 57–64 | Ravi et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Chest; upper arm; wrist; hip; thigh; ankle; ear. | Time-domain; frequency-domain | KNN; Bayesian | 11 | 15 | NA | Atallah et al. [ |
| Accelerometer. | Thigh | Time-domain | Shapelet approach; SVM; NB; KNN; etc. | 4 | 8 | 72–77 | Liu et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; gyroscope | Wrist | Time-domain | ANN; SVM; NB; C4.5 | 30 | 6 | 76.63–95.75 | Ronao et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; gyroscope. | Thigh | Time-domain | RF; SVM; NB. | NA | 4 | 77–99 | Bedogni et al. [ |
| Accelerometer; Gyroscope. | Chest, thigh, ankle | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | Decision tree; KNN; SVM; HMM, etc. | 6 | 12 | 73–98 | Attal et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Wrist | Time-domain; | NB; Decision tree; SVM; C4.5; KNN | 10 | 6 | 63.09–99.56 | Morillo et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Wrist | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | NN; KNN. | 13 | 6 | 79.2–90.4 | Wang et al. [ |
| Accelerometer | Hip | Time-domain; frequency-domain. | KNN; SVM. | 5 | 9 | 70–75.68 | Wang et al. [ |
1 NA: Not Available; 2 C4.5: Decision trees; 3 MLP: Multilayer perception; 4 LR: Logistic Regression; 5 RBM: Restricted Boltzmann Machine; 6 HF-SVM: Hardware-Friendly SVM.
Summary of several vital signs and measurement technologies.
| Vital Sign | Range & Scale | Technique | Tranduced Signal | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Body temperature | 32–45 °C | Thermistors; thermoelectric effects; optical means | Resistance | Husain et al. [ |
| Heart rate | 0.5–4 mV (ECG) | Skin electrode; optical; MI sensor. | Voltage/Current | Anliker et al. [ |
| Respiration Rate | 2–50 b/min 1 | Strain gauge/Impedance | Resistance | Folke et al. [ |
| Blood pressure | 10–400 mm Hg | Piezoelectric capacitors; capacitive strain sensors | Drain current | Schwartzet al. [ |
| Pulse oxygenation | 80%–100% (SpO2) | Optical means. | Photodiode current | Lochner et al. [ |
| Blood glucose | 0.5–1 mM 2 | Electrochemical | Current | Liao et al. [ |
1 b/min: breaths/min; 2 mM: millimoles per liter.