Santé et handicap : d’une conception centrée « utilisateur » à la conception universelle

Abstract

Cet article a pour objectif de présenter deux approches en conception dans les domaines de la santé et du handicap. La première approche, plus classique, dite conception « centrée utilisateur » (CCU), est issue de l’ergonomie des interfaces homme-système (IHS), alors que la deuxième est celle de la conception universelle (appelée aussi conception pour tous) qui est, pour sa part, issue du domaine de l’architecture. Les limites et les avantages de chacune de ces deux approches seront discutés. De plus, nous montrerons que ces deux approches ne sont pas contradictoires, et qu’elles peuvent, au contraire, s’articuler entre elles et devenir ainsi complémentaires. Des pistes d’innovation en termes de méthodologie de conception seront proposées en conclusion.

Identification of Ethical Issues and Practice Recommendations Regarding the Use of Robotic Coaching Solutions for Older Adults: Narrative Review

“…To promote acceptability and usability of RCSs, it is essential to develop them considering the capabilities, needs, and wishes of various users [ 31 , 47 ]. “User-centered design” approaches should be used for this purpose [ 71 ]. This methodology must be performed in a continuous manner to consider the development, new preferences, and experiences of the users.…”

Memory, learning and vicarious brain

“…multihandicaps) and evolutionary character of the handicaps? The UCD is based on the principle that end-users would be best placed to guide the design of a product or service [25]. But, how do we respond to the needs of people who cannot express them either because they do not have the capacity or because they are not aware of their needs?…”

“…The UCD and UD focus on people's abilities-disabilities and the impact of services and assistive devices on their daily lives to overcome-compensate their deficiencies and/or incapacities (UCD) and to improve the environment accessibility (UD) [25]. In KID, the focus is on what people want to be, have and do (e.g.…”

Methods to Design Home Support for Elders

“…But as Lespinet-Najib and al. [25] noted, the UCD approach has its limits. Indeed, "the resulting tools and / or services too often correspond to expectations and needs of the majority (80%) of the population and hence can set people with very specific profiles aside such as people in fragility situation and / or with a disability".…”

“…Lespinet-Najib and al. [25] argue that universal design should not be considered as utopia but as a societal issue that could also be applied to living labs. For these authors, coupling these two types of design would enable on the one hand to compensate for user's functional limitations by developing technical assistances adapted to the use, and on the other hand to take everyone's diversity into account so that the developed device is accessible for everyone.…”