Introduction Socially assistive robots are devices designed to aid users through social interaction and companionship. Social robotics promise to support cognitive health and aging in place for older adults with and without dementia, as well as their care partners. However, while new and more advanced social robots are entering the commercial market, there are still major barriers to their adoption, including a lack of emotional alignment between users and their robots. Affect Control Theory (ACT) is a framework that allows for the computational modeling of emotional alignment between two partners. Methods We conducted a Canadian online survey capturing attitudes, emotions, and perspectives surrounding pet-like robots among older adults ( n = 171), care partners ( n = 28), and persons living with dementia ( n = 7). Results We demonstrate the potential of ACT to model the emotional relationship between older adult users and three exemplar robots. We also capture a rich description of participants’ robot attitudes through the lens of the Technology Acceptance Model, as well as the most important ethical concerns around social robot use. Conclusions Findings from this work will support the development of emotionally aligned, user-centered robots for older adults, care partners, and people living with dementia.

Introduction: Total hip and total knee replacement (THR and TKR) are suggested for reducing joint pain resulting from hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), especially when other interventions have not resulted in desired outcomes. Providing prehabilitation education can improve patients’ psychological and physical well-being before and after surgery. The use of electronic health (eHealth) tools can be considered an effective method to increase patients’ access to prehabilitation, particularly for those facing barriers to attending diagnosis-specific in-person education sessions. However, limited attention is paid to both caregiver and patient perspectives regarding the delivery formats, features, and characteristics of eHealth tools. Method: Patients with hip (n = 46) and knee OA (n = 14) and their family caregivers (n = 16) participated in in-person focus groups or phone interviews. Participants were shown a mock-up of an eHealth module, and asked to share their preferences regarding the formats, features, and characteristics of the eHealth prehabilitation tool. Data was transcribed verbatim and coded using primary thematic and secondary content analyses. Result: Analyses revealed 3 main themes: 1. “easier to understand” emphasizes patients’ preferences on delivery formats and features; 2. “what does that mean?” highlights requests for clear and simple information; and 3. “Preparation, right?” shows patients’ perspectives on the best time to have access to the eHealth tool. Discussion: Participants’ preferences for prehabilitation tools included offering eHealth tools in multiple mediums of delivery (eg, written materials, pictures, videos). Participants preferred simplified information that emphasized the key points and rationale for the knowledge. There were differences in preferred timeline for having access to prehabilitation education, such as some participants wanting to receive prehabilitation well in advance, while others stated just before surgery was adequate. Our findings provide novel and actionable information about patient and caregiver perspectives on features and characteristics of prehabilitation education for patients with hip and knee OA.

IntroductionSocial robot adoption by older adults and people living with dementia is limited by several barriers, including a lack of emotional alignment with social robots and perceptions of stigma around social robot use. The goal of this work was to address these barriers by engaging end-users in discussions on factors that could affect emotional connection to a social robot and considerations around using a social robot in public.MethodsWe conducted seven 90-min online workshops with older adults with (n = 2) and without dementia (n = 25) and care partners (n = 17). Older adults with and without dementia were in their 50s – 80s, and care partners were in their 30s – 70s. Seven older adults, seven care partners, and one older adult with dementia indicated that they had used a robot before. Online workshops had 4-8 participants each, and began with video demonstrations of pet-like robot MiRo and tabletop robot T-Top, as well as a live demonstration of MiRo. Participants completed the Multi-Dimensional Robot Attitude Scale before the workshops and the Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale and two Zoom polls during the workshops. The audio and chat responses from the workshops were transcribed verbatim and content analysis was performed on the transcripts.ResultsOur analysis revealed three broad themes and 10 subthemes. In their discussions on features and applications, participants highlighted preferred forms of communication with a robot and ways in which a robot could support connection between people. For example, robots could improve the quality of communication between care partners and the person for whom they care. While many agreed that a social robot should match their level of emotion and interactivity, participants had different preferences for social robot emotional range and display features. Finally, participants discussed considerations around showing a robot to other people; several participants suggested that a robot could help raise awareness of ageing and dementia while others shared concerns about stigma and attracting negative attention from an audience.DiscussionIncorporating these findings into the design and implementation of social robots will result in devices that are better-suited to the needs of older adults, people living with dementia, and care partners.

ObjectiveGiven growing interest in companion robots to mitigate loneliness, large-scale studies are needed to understand peoples’ perspectives on the use of robots to combat loneliness and attendant ethical issues. This study examines opinions about artificial companion (AC) robots regarding deception with dementia and impact on loneliness.MethodsData are from a survey of 825 members of the OHSU Research via Internet Technology and Experience cohort (response rate = 45%). Sixty percent (n = 496) of the age diverse sample (range = 25–88; M = 64; SD = 13.17) is over 64, allowing us to compare across age and consider current and future older adults. Ordinal logistic regressions examined relationships between age, health, and other socio-demographic characteristics and perceptions of impact on loneliness and comfort with deception.ResultsMost participants (68.7%) did not think an AC robot would make them feel less lonely and felt somewhat-to-very uncomfortable (69.3%) with the idea of being allowed to believe that an artificial companion is human. In adjusted models, one additional year of age was associated with lower likelihood of perceived benefit of reducing loneliness [Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.98; (0.97–0.99), p = 0.003] and lower comfort with deception [OR = 0.99; (0.97–1.00), p = 0.044]. Being female was associated with lower likelihood of comfort with deception [OR = 0.68; (0.50–0.93), p = 0.014] and high confidence using computers with greater comfort [OR = 2.18; (1.42–3.38), p < 0.001].DiscussionThere was not strong support for AC robots to mitigate loneliness. Most participants were uncomfortable with this form of deception, indicating need for design solutions for those who want to avoid this possibility, as well as greater attentiveness to desirability and comfort across age and gender.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a unique and powerful diagnostic tool that provides images without ionizing radiation and, at times, can be the only modality to properly assess and diagnose some pathologies. Although many patients will need an MRI in their lifetime, many of them are still being unjustly denied access to it due to what were once considered absolute contraindications, including MR nonconditional pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. However, there are a number of large studies that have recently demonstrated that MRI can safely be performed in these patients under certain conditions. In addition, there are an increasing number of novel cardiac devices implanted in patients who may require an MRI. Radiologists need to familiarize themselves with these devices, identify which patients with these devices can safely undergo MRI, and under which conditions. In this article, we will review the current literature on MR safety and cardiac devices, elaborate on how to safely image patients with cardiac devices, and share the expertise of our tertiary cardiac institute.