Technology-driven solutions to prompt conversation, aid communication and support interaction for people with dementia and their caregivers: a systematic literature review

Viktoria Hoel, Carine Mendom Feunou, Karin Wolf-Ostermann, Viktoria Hoel, Carine Mendom Feunou, Karin Wolf-Ostermann

Abstract

Background: The impact of dementia for communication skills can result in difficulties in social interactions between people with dementia and their conversation partner, as initiating and maintaining conversations becomes increasingly challenging. The role of technology in enhancing social health and participation for people with dementia is increasing, but the use of technological devices to support social interactions and aid communication quality is still in its infancy. The objective of this literature review is to provide a comprehensive description of technology-driven interventions for people with dementia and their conversation partners to prompt communication and facilitate positive social interactions.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL and PsycINFO, with titles and abstracts independently screened by two researchers. Quality appraisal of the included studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

Results: Of the 18 papers included, the technology most commonly used to facilitate communication and interactions was tablet-computers (n = 7), social robots (n = 5) and computers systems (n = 4). By analyzing the impact of the device(s) for social interaction and communication, four major themes emerged: i) breaking the ice; ii) increased interaction; iii) better understanding of the person with dementia; and iv) reduced pressure for the conversation partner.

Conclusion: While the majority of the included studies are small-scale, they indicate promising findings for the potential of technology to promote interaction in a way that relieves strain on the caregiver, enhances relationships and engages people with dementia in social activities. Rigorous investigation using standard, comparable measurements is needed to demonstrate the effects of technological solutions, as well as to explore and address barriers and potential adverse outcomes.

Keywords: Communication; Dementia; Dyadic relationship; Informal caregivers; Quality of life; Social health; Technology.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the study selection process

References

    1. Prince M, et al. World Alzheimer report 2015. The Global Impact of Dementia. An Analysis of Prevalence, Incidence, Cost and Trends. 2015.
    1. Bielsten T, Hellström I. A review of couple-centred interventions in dementia: exploring the what and why – part a. Dementia. 2019;18(7–8):2436–2449. doi: 10.1177/1471301217737652.
    1. Alm N, et al. A cognitive prosthesis and communication support for people with dementia. Neuropsychol Rehabilitation. 2004;14(1–2):117–134. doi: 10.1080/09602010343000147.
    1. Dröes RM, et al. Social health and dementia: a European consensus on the operationalization of the concept and directions for research and practice. Aging Ment Health. 2017;21(1):4–17. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2016.1254596.
    1. Orrell M, et al. The impact of individual cognitive stimulation therapy (iCST) on cognition, quality of life, caregiver health, and family relationships in dementia: a randomised controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2017;14(3):e1002269. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002269.
    1. Quinn C, et al. The impact of relationships, motivations, and meanings on dementia caregiving outcomes. Int Psychogeriatr. 2012;24(11):1816–1826. doi: 10.1017/S1041610212000889.
    1. Norton MC, et al. Caregiver–recipient closeness and symptom progression in Alzheimer disease. The Cache County dementia progression study. J Gerontol Series B. 2009;64B(5):560–568. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbp052.
    1. Beerens HC, et al. The association between aspects of daily life and quality of life of people with dementia living in long-term care facilities: a momentary assessment study. Int Psychogeriatr. 2016;28(8):1323. doi: 10.1017/S1041610216000466.
    1. Pekkarinen L, et al. Resident care needs and work stressors in special care units versus non-specialized long-term care units. Res Nurs Health. 2006;29(5):465–476. doi: 10.1002/nur.20157.
    1. Cohen-Mansfield J, Dakheel-Ali M, Marx M. Engagement in persons with dementia: the concept and its measurement. Am J Geriatric Psychiatry. 2009;17:299–307. doi: 10.1097/JGP.0b013e31818f3a52.
    1. Hattink B, et al. The electronic, personalizable Rosetta system for dementia care: exploring the user-friendliness, usefulness and impact. Disability Rehabilitation Assistive Technol. 2016;11(1):61–71. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2014.932022.
    1. Meiland FJM, et al. Usability of a new electronic assistive device for community-dwelling persons with mild dementia. Aging Ment Health. 2012;16(5):584–591. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2011.651433.
    1. Lim FS, et al. Usability of tablet computers by people with early-stage dementia. Gerontology. 2013;59(2):174–182. doi: 10.1159/000343986.
    1. Arntzen C, Holthe T, Jentoft R. Tracing the successful incorporation of assistive technology into everyday life for younger people with dementia and family carers. Dementia. 2016;15(4):646–662. doi: 10.1177/1471301214532263.
    1. Rosenberg L, et al. Perceived difficulty in everyday technology use among older adults with or without cognitive deficits. Scand J Occup Ther. 2009;16(4):216–226. doi: 10.3109/11038120802684299.
    1. Jentoft R, Holthe T, Arntzen C. The use of assistive technology in the everyday lives of young people living with dementia and their caregivers. Can a simple remote control make a difference? Int Psychogeriatr. 2014;26(12):2011–2021. doi: 10.1017/S1041610214001069.
    1. Meiland F, et al. Technologies to support community-dwelling persons with dementia: a position paper on issues regarding development, usability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, deployment, and ethics. JMIR Rehabilitation Assistive Technol. 2017;4(1):e1. doi: 10.2196/rehab.6376.
    1. Kindell J, et al. Everyday conversation in dementia: a review of the literature to inform research and practice. Int J Language Communication Disorders. 2017;52(4):392–406. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12298.
    1. Grant, M.J. and A. Booth, A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. 2009: Oxford, UK. p. 91-108.
    1. Pluye P, Hong QN. Combining the power of stories and the power of numbers: mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews. Annu Rev Public Health. 2014;35(1):29–45. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182440.
    1. Hong QN, et al. The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Educ Inf. 2018;34(4):285–291.
    1. Samuelsson C, Ekström A. Digital communication support in interaction involving people with dementia. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocol. 2019;44(1):41–50. doi: 10.1080/14015439.2019.1554856.
    1. Ekström A, Ferm U, Samuelsson C. Digital communication support and Alzheimer's disease. Dementia. 2017;16(6):711–731. doi: 10.1177/1471301215615456.
    1. Dassa A. "opening our time capsule"-creating an individualized music and other memory cues database to promote communication between spouses and people with dementia during visits to a nursing home. Front Med. 2018;5.
    1. Gilson A, et al. Using computer tablets to improve moods for older adults with dementia and interactions with their caregivers: pilot intervention study. JMIR Formative Research. 2019;3(3):e14530. doi: 10.2196/14530.
    1. McAllister, M., et al., Memory Keeper: A prototype digital application to improve engagement with people with dementia in long-term care (innovative practice). Dementia, 2017: 1471301217737872.
    1. Laird EA, et al. Using Mobile technology to provide personalized reminiscence for people living with dementia and their Carers: appraisal of outcomes from a quasi-experimental study. JMIR Mental Health. 2018;5(3):e57. doi: 10.2196/mental.9684.
    1. Tyack C, et al. Viewing art on a tablet computer: a well-being intervention for people with dementia and their caregivers. J Appl Gerontol. 2017;36(7):864–894. doi: 10.1177/0733464815617287.
    1. D'Onofrio G, et al. MARIO project: validation and evidence of service robots for older people with dementia. J Alzheimer's Disease. 2019;68(4):1587–1601. doi: 10.3233/JAD-181165.
    1. Robinson H, et al. Suitability of healthcare robots for a dementia unit and suggested improvements. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013;14(1):34–40. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2012.09.006.
    1. Liang A, et al. A pilot randomized trial of a companion robot for people with dementia living in the community. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017;18(10):871–878. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2017.05.019.
    1. Moyle W, et al. "She had a smile on her face as wide as the great Australian bite": a qualitative examination of family perceptions of a therapeutic robot and a plush toy. Special Issue: Technology and Aging: An Evolving Partnership. 2019;59(1):177–185.
    1. Shibata T. Therapeutic seal robot as biofeedback medical device: qualitative and quantitative evaluations of robot therapy in dementia care. Proc IEEE. 2012;100(8):2527–2538. doi: 10.1109/JPROC.2012.2200559.
    1. Bemelmans R, et al. Effectiveness of robot Paro in intramural psychogeriatric care: a multicenter quasi-experimental study. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015;16(11):946–950. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2015.05.007.
    1. Hung L, et al. The benefits of and barriers to using a social robot PARO in care settings: a scoping review. BMC Geriatr. 2019;19(1):232. doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1244-6.
    1. Bemelmans R, et al. How to use robot interventions in intramural psychogeriatric care; a feasibility study. Appl Nurs Res. 2016;30:154–157. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2015.07.003.
    1. Gustafsson C, Svanberg C, Müllersdorf M. Using a robotic cat in dementia care. J Gerontol Nurs. 2015;41(10):46–56. doi: 10.3928/00989134-20150806-44.
    1. Davison TE, et al. A personalized multimedia device to treat agitated behavior and improve mood in people with dementia: A pilot study. Geriatric Nurs (New York, N.Y.) 2016;37(1):25–29. doi: 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2015.08.013.
    1. Lazar A, Demiris G, Thompson HJ. Evaluation of a multifunctional technology system in a memory care unit: opportunities for innovation in dementia care. Informatics Health Social Care. 2016;41(4):373–386. doi: 10.3109/17538157.2015.1064428.
    1. Lazar A, Demiris G, Thompson HJ. Involving family members in the implementation and evaluation of Technologies for Dementia. J Gerontol Nurs. 2015;41(4):21–26. doi: 10.3928/00989134-20150309-03.
    1. Karlsson E, et al. "carpe diem": supporting conversations between individuals with dementia and their family members. J Gerontol Nurs. 2014;40(2):38–46. doi: 10.3928/00989134-20130916-07.
    1. Damianakis T, et al. The psychosocial impacts of multimedia biographies on persons with cognitive impairments. Gerontologist. 2010;50(1):23–35. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnp104.
    1. Garlinghouse A, et al. Creating objects with 3D printers to stimulate reminiscence in memory loss: a mixed-method feasibility study. Informatics Health Social Care. 2018;43(4):362–378. doi: 10.1080/17538157.2017.1290640.
    1. Ryan, A.A., et al., 'There is still so much inside': The impact of personalised reminiscence, facilitated by a tablet device, on people living with mild to moderate dementia and their family carers. Dementia (London, England), 2018: 1471301218795242.
    1. Marvardi M, et al. The caregiver burden inventory in evaluating the burden of caregivers of elderly demented patients: results from a multicenter study. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2005;17:46–53. doi: 10.1007/BF03337720.
    1. JPND - EU joint Programme -neurodegenerative disease research, Dementia Outcome Measures: Charting New Territory. 2015, JPND: .
    1. Schölzel-Dorenbos, C.J.M., et al., Evaluating the outcome of interventions on quality of life in dementia: selection of the appropriate scale. 2007: Chichester, UK p 511-519.
    1. Logsdon RG, et al. Quality of life in Alzheimer's disease: patient and caregiver reports. J Mental Health Aging. 1999;5:21–32.
    1. Weiner MF, et al. The quality of life in late-stage dementia (QUALID) scale. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2000;1(3):114–116.
    1. Moon H, Adams KB. The effectiveness of dyadic interventions for people with dementia and their caregivers. Dementia. 2013;12(6):821–839. doi: 10.1177/1471301212447026.
    1. Tyack C, Camic P. Touchscreen interventions and the well-being of people with dementia and caregivers: a systematic review. Int Psychogeriatr. 2017;29(8):1261–1280. doi: 10.1017/S1041610217000667.
    1. Swan J, et al. Meaningful occupation with iPads: experiences of residents and staff in an older person's mental health setting. Br J Occup Ther. 2018;81(11):649–656. doi: 10.1177/0308022618767620.
    1. Edvardsson D, Winblad B, Sandman P-O. Person-centred care of people with severe Alzheimer's disease: current status and ways forward. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7(4):362–367. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70063-2.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться