Potential of using an assistive technology to address meal preparation difficulties following acquired brain injury: clients’ and caregivers’ perspectives

Zarshenas, Sareh; Gagnon-Roy, Mireille; Couture, Mélanie; Bier, Nathalie; Giroux, Sylvain; Nalder, Emily; Pigot, Hélène; Dawson, Deirdre; Poncet, F.; leDorze, Guylaine; Bottari, Carolina

doi:10.1080/17483107.2020.1867244

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other recent work on COOK has expanded its validation by testing its suitability for use by other persons having sustained a TBI or living with neurodegenerative diseases. Results from these other studies have shown that COOK's main functionalities are well suited for a broader group of individuals with TBI [65][66][67][68] as well as in the continuum from normal aging to early Alzheimer disease [69].…”

Section: Principal Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Future studies on COOK will need to determine whether these results can be applied to other living contexts such as persons with TBI living alone in their homes in the community or in other supported residences. Preliminary results indicate that COOK is also promising in these other contexts [65][66][67][68], although some modifications may be necessary to tackle their specificities such as the absence of 24/7 supervision.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development of an Assistive Technology for Cognition to Support Meal Preparation in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: User-Centered Design Study

Pinard¹,

Bottari²,

Laliberté³

et al. 2022

JMIR Hum Factors

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Although assistive technology for cognition (ATC) has enormous potential to help individuals who have sustained a severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) prepare meals safely, no ATC has yet been developed to assist in this activity for this specific population. Objective This study aims to conduct a needs analysis as a first step in the design of an ATC to support safe and independent meal preparation for persons with severe TBI. This included identifying cooking-related risks to depict future users’ profiles and establishing the clinical requirements of the ATC. Methods In a user-centered design study, the needs of 3 future users were evaluated in their real-world environments (supported-living residence) using an ecological assessment of everyday activities, a review of their medical files, a complete neuropsychological test battery, individual interviews, observational field notes, and log journals with the residents, their families, and other stakeholders from the residence (eg, staff and health professionals). The needs analysis was guided by the Disability Creation Process framework. Results The results showed that many issues had to be considered for the development of the ATC for the 3 residents and other eventual users, including cognitive issues such as distractibility and difficulty remembering information over a short period of time and important safety issues, such as potential food poisoning and risk of fire. This led to the identification of 2 main clinical requirements for the ATC: providing cognitive support based on evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation to facilitate meal preparation and ensuring safety at each step of the meal preparation task. Conclusions This needs analysis identified the main requirements for an ATC designed to support meal preparation for persons with severe TBI. Future research will focus on implementing the ATC in the residence and evaluating its usability.

show abstract

Section: Principal Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of an Assistive Technology for Cognition to Support Meal Preparation in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: User-Centered Design Study

Pinard¹,

Bottari²,

Laliberté³

et al. 2022

JMIR Hum Factors

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, in accordance with user-centered design, our research team strongly considered the end users' needs by including usability evaluation with experts and end users in a laboratory context (study 1 and 2), real-world implementation of the technology [15], and qualitative interviews with stakeholders [42][43][44][45], thus contrasting from technologies developed and tested only in a laboratory setting. However, it should be noted that all included participants were adults aged <65 years.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Smart Assistive Technology for Cooking for People With Cognitive Impairments Following a Traumatic Brain Injury: User Experience Study

Gagnon-Roy¹,

Pinard²,

Bottari³

et al. 2022

JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background User experience (UX), including usability, should be formally assessed multiple times throughout the development process to optimize the acceptability and integration of a new technology before implementing it within the home environment of people living with cognitive impairments. Objective The aim of this study is to identify UX issues, notably usability issues, and factors to consider for the future implementation of the COOK (Cognitive Orthosis for Cooking) within the home of individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) to identify modifications to improve the technology. Methods This study comprised two rounds of UX evaluations, including extensive usability testing, which were completed in a laboratory context: 3 sessions with 5 experts and, after improvement of COOK, 2 sessions with 10 participants with TBI. Each session included the use of scenarios and questionnaires on UX and usability. Results Both rounds demonstrated good usability outcomes and hedonic qualities. Various usability issues were identified by participants, such as navigation inconsistencies, technical bugs, and the need for more feedback. Factors to consider in the future implementation of COOK were also mentioned by participants with TBI, including environmental (eg, space available and presence of pets) and personal factors (eg, level of comfort with technology, presence of visual deficits, and preferences). Conclusions By evaluating UX, including usability, various times throughout the development process and including experts and end users, our research team was able to develop a technology that was perceived as usable, pleasant, and well-designed. This research is an example of how and when people with cognitive impairments (ie, people with TBI) can be involved in evaluating the UX of new technology.

show abstract

“…Existing studies have been narrowly focused, targeting a specific, single type of AT such as cognitive orthoses, physical rehabilitation technology or smartphone applications. Challenges faced by clinicians documented in these studies include insufficient knowledge and skills to evaluate emerging AT (Gagnon-Roy et al, 2021; de Joode et al, 2012; O’Neil-Pirozzi et al, 2004; Plackett et al, 2017; Zarshenas et al, 2020), inadequate funding and opportunity to trial AT (O’Neil-Pirozzi et al, 2004; Wong et al, 2017; Zarshenas et al, 2020) and limited timely technical support during the implementation process (Gagnon-Roy et al, 2021; O’Neil-Pirozzi et al, 2004). The severity of ABI was also perceived to be a significant clinical consideration that impacted effective learning of new technology by their clients (Oyesanya et al, 2021; Wong et al, 2017; Zarshenas et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Challenges faced by clinicians documented in these studies include insufficient knowledge and skills to evaluate emerging AT (Gagnon-Roy et al, 2021; de Joode et al, 2012; O’Neil-Pirozzi et al, 2004; Plackett et al, 2017; Zarshenas et al, 2020), inadequate funding and opportunity to trial AT (O’Neil-Pirozzi et al, 2004; Wong et al, 2017; Zarshenas et al, 2020) and limited timely technical support during the implementation process (Gagnon-Roy et al, 2021; O’Neil-Pirozzi et al, 2004). The severity of ABI was also perceived to be a significant clinical consideration that impacted effective learning of new technology by their clients (Oyesanya et al, 2021; Wong et al, 2017; Zarshenas et al, 2020). While these studies provide an insight into the clinician experience with specific types of AT, a broader understanding is required to build holistic strategies to support clinician capability with any type of AT.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinician experiences with using assistive technology in brain injury rehabilitation: a survey of clinician capability, attitudes, and barriers

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The rise in assistive technology (AT) solutions to support people with an acquired brain injury (ABI) has warranted clinicians to build capability in assisting clients to select goal-centred AT. The study explored, amongst ABI clinicians, (a) capability, attitudes, and barriers with AT implementation, (b) age-related differences in technology self-efficacy and capability (c) strategies to support AT use in rehabilitation and (d) thematic analysis of AT-related experiences. Method: Mixed methods design. Online survey circulated to ABI clinicians across New South Wales, Australia, comprising purpose-designed items as well as the Modified Computer Self-Efficacy Scale (MCSES; range 0–100) Results: Clinicians (n = 123) were evenly distributed across decadal age groups. The majority were female (90%, n = 111) and one-third were occupational therapists. Clinicians scored strongly on the MCSES (Mdn = 76, IQR = 19), with younger age groups significantly associated with higher scores (H[3] = 9.667, p = .022). Most clinicians (92%) were knowledgeable of mainstream technology for personal use, but over half (65%) reported insufficient knowledge of suitable AT for clients. Clinicians reported positive attitudes towards AT, however, time to research and develop proficiency with a range of AT was the primary barrier (81%). Thematic analysis suggested that whilst the ideal AT experience is client-motivated requiring multidisciplinary guidance, the clinician role and experience with AT is evolving, influenced by rapid technological advancement and extrinsic opportunities to access AT. Conclusions: Whilst clinicians have positive attitudes towards AT, there is a gap in clinician implementation. There is need to support further resources to build clinician capability and access to AT.

show abstract

Potential of using an assistive technology to address meal preparation difficulties following acquired brain injury: clients’ and caregivers’ perspectives

Cited by 8 publications

References 38 publications

Development of an Assistive Technology for Cognition to Support Meal Preparation in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: User-Centered Design Study

Development of an Assistive Technology for Cognition to Support Meal Preparation in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: User-Centered Design Study

Smart Assistive Technology for Cooking for People With Cognitive Impairments Following a Traumatic Brain Injury: User Experience Study

Clinician experiences with using assistive technology in brain injury rehabilitation: a survey of clinician capability, attitudes, and barriers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About