Participatory Design With Seniors: Design of Future Services and Iterative Refinements of Interactive eHealth Services for Old Citizens

Isabella Scandurra, Marie Sjölinder, Isabella Scandurra, Marie Sjölinder

Abstract

Background: There is an increasing social isolation among the elderly today. This will be an even larger issue in the future with growing numbers of elderly and less resources, for example, in terms of economy and staff. Loneliness and social isolation can, however, be addressed in several ways using different interactive eHealth services.

Objective: This case study investigated novel eHealth services for the elderly, and their usage of a social interactive device designed especially for them.

Methods: In this work, we used an innovative mobile communication device connected to the television (TV), which worked as a remotely controlled large interactive screen. The device was tested by 8 volunteers who visited a senior center. They were between 65 and 80 years of age and lived in their own homes. Throughout the 1.5 year-long project, 7 design workshops were held with the seniors and the staff at the center. During these workshops, demands and preferences regarding existing and new services were gathered. At the end of the project the participants' experience of the device and of the services was elaborated in 3 workshops to get ideas for improved or new meaningful services. During the data analyses and development process, what seniors thought would be useful in relation to what was feasible was prioritized by the development company.

Results: Regarding daily usage, the seniors reported that they mainly used the service for receiving information from the senior center and for communication with other participants in the group or with younger relatives. They also read information about events at the senior center and they liked to perform a weekly sent out workout exercise. Further, they played games such as Memory and Sudoku using the device. The service development focused on three categories of services: cognitive activities, social activities, and physical activities. A cognitive activity service that would be meaningful to develop was a game for practicing working memory. In the social activities category, the seniors wanted different quizzes and multi-player games. For physical activities, the seniors desired more workout exercises and suggestions for guided walking routes. A new category, "information and news", was suggested since they lacked services like senior-customized global and local news.

Conclusions: This study showed the importance of input from a group of seniors when designing new services for elderly citizens. Besides input to interactive eHealth service development for seniors, this study showed the importance of a social context around such work. The seniors were very engaged throughout the project and workshops were frequently visited and the seniors became friends. The high amount of input from the seniors could be explained in terms of social inclusion; they belonged to a group and each member was considered important for the work. The friendly workshop atmosphere facilitated new ideas and redesign of the services.

Keywords: Internet; community networks; community-based participatory research; elderly users; interdisciplinary communication; professional-patient relations; seniors; social inclusion; systems analysis; television.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no current financial involvement with the company Ippi AB.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The communication device, a prototype called ippi, connected to the TV-set.
Figure 2
Figure 2
An example of a workout instruction for seniors; push-ups. This kind of illustration of the workout exercises (using a baby instead of an adult) was appreciated by the seniors.

References

    1. McConatha D. Aging online: toward a theory of e-quality. In: Morrell R W, editor. Older adults, health information, and the World Wide Web. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2002. pp. 21–41.
    1. Östlund B, Lindén K. Turning older peoples' experiences into innovations: Ippi as the convergence of mobile services and TV viewing. Gerontechnology. 2011;10(2):103–109. doi: 10.4017/gt.2011.10.2.003.00.
    1. Findahl O. Older Swedes and the Internet 2010. Stockholm: World Internet Institute; 2011. pp. 10–11.
    1. Östlund B. Report 9. Stockholm, Sweden: Kommunikationsforskningsberedningen; 1999. Images, users, practices - senior citizens entering the IT-society.
    1. Cody MJ, Dunn D, Hoppin S, Wendt P. Silver surfers: training and evaluating Internet use among older adult learners. Communication Research. 1999;48(4):269–286. doi: 10.1080/03634529909379178.
    1. O’rourke K, Heckman J, Elwood D. Development and exploration of a multifaceted social platform to improve patient education, communication, and activity. Medicine 2.0 2012; September; Boston. 2012.
    1. Findahl O. The Swedes and the Internet 2011. Stockholm: World Internet Institute; 2011. pp. 14–31.
    1. Scandurra I. Report #3 (in Swedish) Stockholm, Sweden: R&D Seniorium; 2011. Sustainable and quality-based communication services in elderly care.
    1. Greenbaum JM, Kyng M. Design at work: cooperative design of computer systems. Hillsdale, NJ: L Erlbaum Associates; 1991. Introduction: situated design; p. 1.
    1. Schuler D, Namioka A. Participatory design: principles and practices. Hillsdale, NJ: L Erlbaum Associates; 1993.
    1. Constantine LL, Lockwood LAD. Software for use: a practical guide to the models and methods of usage-centered design. New York: Addison-Wesley Professional; 1999.
    1. Jungk R, Mullert N, Edwards NA. Future workshops: how to create desirable futures. London: Institute for Social Inventions; 1996.
    1. Scandurra I, Hägglund M, Koch S. From user needs to system specifications: multi-disciplinary thematic seminars as a collaborative design method for development of health information systems. J Biomed Inform. 2008 Aug;41(4):557–569. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.01.012.
    1. Dickinson A, Dewsbury G. Designing computer technologies with older people. Gerontechnology. 2006;5(1):1–3. doi: 10.4017/gt.2006.05.01.001.00.
    1. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press; 2003.
    1. Charmaz K. Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. California: Sage Publications, Inc; 2011. pp. 359–381.
    1. Mulder S, Yaar Z. The user is always right: a practical guide to creating and using personas for the Web. Berkeley, CA: New Riders; 2007.
    1. Östlund B. Teknik, IToch åldrande - Hur fungerar det för patienter, omsorgstagare och äldre medborgare? (Technology, IT and ageing: how does it work for patients, social care receivers and old citizens?) Stockholm: Liber AB; 2012.
    1. Wyatt S. Non-users also matter: the construction of users and non-users of the Internet. In: Oudshoorn N, Pinch T, editors. How users matter: the co-construction of users and technologies. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2003. pp. 67–80.
    1. Hägglund M, Davoody N, Bolin P, Winsnes C, Lundberg N, Vimarlund V, Koch S. Stroke patients' needs for access to care process related information. Medicine 2.0; September; Boston. 2012.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever