Sleep–wake monitoring of people with intellectual disability: Examining the agreement of <scp>EMFIT QS</scp> and actigraphy

Buimer, Hendrik P.; Siebelink, Nienke M.; Gaasterland, Annemarije; van Dam, Kirstin; Smits, Annelies; Frederiks, Kyra; van der Poel, Agnes

doi:10.1111/jar.13146

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(62 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, organizations evaluated their IT and organizational readiness to implement the selected technology [ 28 , 29 ]. The care issues included, for example, improving day structure [ 30 ] or sleep-wake patterns [ 31 ], lowering stress levels, and increasing independent living [ 32 ]. Digital care technologies included sensors, domotics, social robotics, and apps.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Action Opportunities to Pursue Responsible Digital Care for People With Intellectual Disabilities: Qualitative Study

Siebelink,

van Dam,

Lukkien

et al. 2024

JMIR Ment Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Responsible digital care refers to any intentional systematic effort designed to increase the likelihood of a digital care technology developed through ethical decision-making, being socially responsible and aligned with the values and well-being of those impacted by it. Objective We aimed to present examples of action opportunities for (1) designing “technology”; (2) shaping the “context” of use; and (3) adjusting the behavior of “users” to guide responsible digital care for people with intellectual disabilities. Methods Three cases were considered: (1) design of a web application to support the preparation of meals for groups of people with intellectual disabilities, (2) implementation of an app to help people with intellectual disabilities regulate their stress independently, and (3) implementation of a social robot to stimulate interaction and physical activity among people with intellectual disabilities. Overall, 26 stakeholders participated in 3 multistakeholder workshops (case 1: 10/26, 38%; case 2: 10/26, 38%; case 3: 6/26, 23%) based on the “guidance ethics approach.” We identified stakeholders’ values based on bottom-up exploration of experienced and expected effects of using the technology, and we formulated action opportunities for these values in the specific context of use. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Results Overall, 232 effects, 33 values, and 156 action opportunities were collected. General and case-specific themes were identified. Important stakeholder values included quality of care, autonomy, efficiency, health, enjoyment, reliability, and privacy. Both positive and negative effects could underlie stakeholders’ values and influence the development of action opportunities. Action opportunities comprised the following: (1) technology: development of the technology (eg, user experience and customization), technology input (eg, recipes for meals, intervention options for reducing stress, and activities), and technology output (eg, storage and use of data); (2) context: guidelines, training and support, policy or agreements, and adjusting the physical environment in which the technology is used; and (3) users: integrating the technology into daily care practice, by diminishing (eg, “letting go” to increase the autonomy of people with intellectual disabilities), retaining (eg, face-to-face contact), and adding (eg, evaluation moments) certain behaviors of care professionals. Conclusions This is the first study to provide insight into responsible digital care for people with intellectual disabilities by means of bottom-up exploration of action opportunities to take account of stakeholders’ values in designing technology, shaping the context of use, and adjusting the behavior of users. Although part of the findings may be generalized, case-specific insights and a complementary top-down approach (eg, predefined ethical frameworks) are essential. The findings represent a part of an ethical discourse that requires follow-up to meet the dynamism of stakeholders’ values and further develop and implement action opportunities to achieve socially desirable, ethically acceptable, and sustainable digital care that improves the lives of people with intellectual disabilities.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Action Opportunities to Pursue Responsible Digital Care for People With Intellectual Disabilities: Qualitative Study

Siebelink,

van Dam,

Lukkien

et al. 2024

JMIR Ment Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…26 27 The ballistic forces generated collect activity and physiological data during sleep including sleep time, sleep classes, heart rate, breathing rate, movement and bed occupancy and exits. 27 Phase I Dashboard integration A protocol will be developed for extracting data from digital technologies (wearable activity trackers and sleep tracking sensors) and resident clinical information and medication records into the TCC-ADEPT platform. The TCC-ADEPT platform will include a dashboard with longitudinal visualisations of changes in residents' health and well-being over time (ie, physical activity, sleep quality, blood pressure, etc) using data loaded from the digital technologies and clinical data (figure 1).…”

Section: Fibion Emfitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Digitally Enabled, Pharmacist service to detecT medicine harms in residential aged care (nursing home) (ADEPT): protocol for a feasibility study

Boord,

Brown,

Soriano

et al. 2024

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis feasibility study aims to develop and test a new model of practice in Australia using digital technologies to enable pharmacists to monitor early signs and symptoms of medicine-induced harms in residential aged care.Methods and analysisThirty residents will be recruited from an aged care facility in South Australia. The study will be conducted in two phases. In phase I, the study team will work with aged care software providers and developers of digital technologies (a wearable activity tracker and a sleep tracking sensor) to gather physical activity and sleep data, as well as medication and clinical data from the electronic medication management system and aged care clinical software. Data will be centralised into a cloud-based monitoring platform (TeleClinical Care (TCC)). The TCC will be used to create dashboards that will include longitudinal visualisations of changes in residents’ health, function and medicine use over time. In phase II, the on-site pharmacist will use the centralised TCC platform to monitor each resident’s medicine, clinical, physical activity and sleep data to identify signs of medicine-induced harms over a 12-week period.A mixed methods process evaluation applying the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) evaluation framework will be used to assess the feasibility of the service. Outcome measures include service reach, changes in resident symptom scores (measured using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System), number of medication adverse events detected, changes in physical activity and sleep, number of pharmacist recommendations provided, cost analysis and proportion of all pharmacists’ recommendations implemented at 4-week, 8-week and 12-week postbaseline period.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been obtained from the University of South Australia’s Human Research Ethics Committee (205098). Findings will be disseminated through published manuscripts, conference presentations and reporting to the study funder.Trial registration numberACTRN12623000506695.

show abstract

Barriers and facilitators influencing implementation of care technology for people with intellectual disabilities: A cross‐sectional study among care professionals

Siebelink,

Gaasterland,

Gielissen

et al. 2024

Research Intellect Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundImplementation issues often hinder reaching the potential of care technology to improve daily lives of people with intellectual disabilities. We investigated barriers to and facilitators of implementing different technology modalities (app/social robot/sensor/domotics) in long‐term care.MethodCare professionals (N = 83) from 12 Dutch disability care organisations completed a customised measurement instrument for determinants of innovations (MIDI) questionnaire.ResultsOut of 27 determinants, 20 were identified as facilitators and 16 as barriers. We highlight common barriers: few colleagues who work with the technology; no (awareness of) formal ratification of technology use; no arrangements regarding turnover of staff using the technology; unsettling organisational changes; technological defects and limited IT preconditions.ConclusionsThe results, which could be combined and compared across study sites, provide insight into which implementation determinants were already well addressed, and where there is ground to gain when implementing care technology in disability care organisations.

show abstract

Sleep–wake monitoring of people with intellectual disability: Examining the agreement of EMFIT QS and actigraphy

Cited by 3 publications

References 38 publications

Action Opportunities to Pursue Responsible Digital Care for People With Intellectual Disabilities: Qualitative Study

Action Opportunities to Pursue Responsible Digital Care for People With Intellectual Disabilities: Qualitative Study

A Digitally Enabled, Pharmacist service to detecT medicine harms in residential aged care (nursing home) (ADEPT): protocol for a feasibility study

Barriers and facilitators influencing implementation of care technology for people with intellectual disabilities: A cross‐sectional study among care professionals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About