Implementing Affordable Socially Assistive Pet Robots in Care Homes Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Stratified Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial and Mixed Methods Study.

COVID-19 companion robots dementia older adults robot pets social robots well-being

Journal

JMIR aging
ISSN: 2561-7605
Titre abrégé: JMIR Aging
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101740387

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
24 Aug 2022
Historique:
received: 19 04 2022
accepted: 08 07 2022
revised: 10 06 2022
pubmed: 14 7 2022
medline: 14 7 2022
entrez: 13 7 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Robot pets may assist in the challenges of supporting an aging population with growing dementia prevalence. Prior work has focused on the impacts of the robot seal Paro on older adult well-being, but recent studies have suggested the good acceptability and implementation feasibility of more affordable devices (Joy for All [JfA] cats and dogs). We aimed to address the limited effectiveness research on JfA devices. We conducted an 8-month, stratified, cluster randomized controlled trial in 8 care homes in Cornwall, United Kingdom. Over 4 months, 4 care homes each received 2 JfA devices (1 cat and 1 dog; intervention group), and 4 homes received care as usual (control group). Psychometrics were collected before and after the intervention to compare the change from baseline to follow-up between the groups. In the final 4 months, all 8 care homes received devices, but only qualitative data were collected owing to COVID-19 and reduced capacity. The primary outcome was neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory [NPI] Nursing Home version). Care provider burden was a secondary outcome (occupational disruptiveness NPI subscale), alongside the Challenging Behavior scale, the Holden communication scale, the Campaign to End Loneliness questionnaire, and medication use. Qualitative data were collected through care staff observation calendars and end-of-study interviews to understand use, experience, and impact. We also collected demographic data and assessed dementia severity. In total, 253 residents had robot interaction opportunities, and 83 were consented for direct data collection. There was a significant difference in the total change from baseline to follow-up between the intervention and control groups for NPI (P<.001) and occupational disruptiveness (P=.03). Neuropsychiatric symptoms increased in the control group and decreased in the intervention group. No significant difference was seen for communication issues or challenging behavior. For NPI subdomains, there were significant differences from baseline to follow-up in delusions (P=.03), depression (P=.01), anxiety (P=.001), elation (P=.02), and apathy (P=.009), all of which decreased in the intervention group and increased slightly in the control group. The summative impact results suggested that most residents (46/54, 85%) who interacted with robots experienced a positive impact. Those who interacted had significantly higher dementia severity scores (P=.001). The qualitative results suggested good adoption, acceptability, and suitability for subjectively lonely individuals and lack of a novelty effect through sustained use, and demonstrated that the reasons for use were entertainment, anxiety, and agitation. Affordable robot pets hold potential for improving the well-being of care home residents and people with dementia, including reducing neuropsychiatric symptoms and occupational disruptiveness. This work suggests no novelty effect and contributes toward understanding robot pet suitability. Moreover, interactions were more common among residents with more moderate/severe dementia and those subjectively lonely. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04168463; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04168463.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Robot pets may assist in the challenges of supporting an aging population with growing dementia prevalence. Prior work has focused on the impacts of the robot seal Paro on older adult well-being, but recent studies have suggested the good acceptability and implementation feasibility of more affordable devices (Joy for All [JfA] cats and dogs).
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
We aimed to address the limited effectiveness research on JfA devices.
METHODS METHODS
We conducted an 8-month, stratified, cluster randomized controlled trial in 8 care homes in Cornwall, United Kingdom. Over 4 months, 4 care homes each received 2 JfA devices (1 cat and 1 dog; intervention group), and 4 homes received care as usual (control group). Psychometrics were collected before and after the intervention to compare the change from baseline to follow-up between the groups. In the final 4 months, all 8 care homes received devices, but only qualitative data were collected owing to COVID-19 and reduced capacity. The primary outcome was neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory [NPI] Nursing Home version). Care provider burden was a secondary outcome (occupational disruptiveness NPI subscale), alongside the Challenging Behavior scale, the Holden communication scale, the Campaign to End Loneliness questionnaire, and medication use. Qualitative data were collected through care staff observation calendars and end-of-study interviews to understand use, experience, and impact. We also collected demographic data and assessed dementia severity. In total, 253 residents had robot interaction opportunities, and 83 were consented for direct data collection.
RESULTS RESULTS
There was a significant difference in the total change from baseline to follow-up between the intervention and control groups for NPI (P<.001) and occupational disruptiveness (P=.03). Neuropsychiatric symptoms increased in the control group and decreased in the intervention group. No significant difference was seen for communication issues or challenging behavior. For NPI subdomains, there were significant differences from baseline to follow-up in delusions (P=.03), depression (P=.01), anxiety (P=.001), elation (P=.02), and apathy (P=.009), all of which decreased in the intervention group and increased slightly in the control group. The summative impact results suggested that most residents (46/54, 85%) who interacted with robots experienced a positive impact. Those who interacted had significantly higher dementia severity scores (P=.001). The qualitative results suggested good adoption, acceptability, and suitability for subjectively lonely individuals and lack of a novelty effect through sustained use, and demonstrated that the reasons for use were entertainment, anxiety, and agitation.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Affordable robot pets hold potential for improving the well-being of care home residents and people with dementia, including reducing neuropsychiatric symptoms and occupational disruptiveness. This work suggests no novelty effect and contributes toward understanding robot pet suitability. Moreover, interactions were more common among residents with more moderate/severe dementia and those subjectively lonely.
TRIAL REGISTRATION BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04168463; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04168463.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35830959
pii: v5i3e38864
doi: 10.2196/38864
pmc: PMC9407160
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04168463']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e38864

Informations de copyright

©Hannah Bradwell, Katie J Edwards, Rhona Winnington, Serge Thill, Victoria Allgar, Ray B Jones. Originally published in JMIR Aging (https://aging.jmir.org), 24.08.2022.

Références

J Adv Nurs. 2008 Apr;62(1):107-15
pubmed: 18352969
Am J Med. 2019 Jul;132(7):781-782
pubmed: 30738728
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2000 Winter;8(1):75-83
pubmed: 10648298
J Alzheimers Dis. 2016 Nov 19;55(2):569-574
pubmed: 27716673
BMJ Open. 2019 Sep 26;9(9):e032468
pubmed: 31558461
BMJ Open. 2016 Dec 13;6(12):e013447
pubmed: 27965255
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017 Sep 1;18(9):766-773
pubmed: 28780395
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015 Jul;63(7):1448-52
pubmed: 26046666
Int J Older People Nurs. 2019 Sep;14(3):e12239
pubmed: 31070870
JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021 Nov 1;8(4):e30337
pubmed: 34723825
Evid Based Ment Health. 2016 Aug;19(3):86-9
pubmed: 27443678
Korean J Fam Med. 2013 Jul;34(4):227
pubmed: 23904951
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015 Oct 1;16(10):867-73
pubmed: 26096582
Gerontologist. 2019 Jan 9;59(1):e37-e51
pubmed: 29897445
BMC Geriatr. 2020 Jul 14;20(1):244
pubmed: 32664904
J Palliat Med. 2020 Mar;23(3):432-434
pubmed: 31328997
J Aging Res. 2016;2016:8569602
pubmed: 27990301
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015 Nov 1;16(11):946-50
pubmed: 26115817
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2020 Oct 16;75(9):2018-2028
pubmed: 32789476
BMJ. 2012 Sep 04;345:e5661
pubmed: 22951546
JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021 Feb 12;8(1):e25340
pubmed: 33497349
PLoS One. 2020 Aug 26;15(8):e0237069
pubmed: 32845891
Aging Ment Health. 2021 Jul;25(7):1239-1245
pubmed: 32363903
BMJ. 2015 Feb 06;350:h391
pubmed: 25662947
Dementia (London). 2021 May;20(4):1300-1318
pubmed: 32668978
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013 Sep;14(9):661-7
pubmed: 23545466
Front Aging Neurosci. 2015 Jul 23;7:141
pubmed: 26257646
Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 1996 Spring;10(1):31-9
pubmed: 8919494
Clin Interv Aging. 2014 Jul 08;9:1051-61
pubmed: 25031530
Br J Clin Psychol. 2001 Sep;40(3):309-22
pubmed: 11593958
Aging Ment Health. 2019 Mar;23(3):329-336
pubmed: 29282989

Auteurs

Hannah Bradwell (H)

Centre for Health Technology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom.

Katie J Edwards (KJ)

Centre for Health Technology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom.

Rhona Winnington (R)

School of Clinical Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.

Serge Thill (S)

Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition, and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands.

Victoria Allgar (V)

Centre for Health Technology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom.

Ray B Jones (RB)

Centre for Health Technology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom.

Classifications MeSH