Date Presented 04/05/19
Two state-of-the-art technological approaches (store-and-forward videos and telepresence robots) were compared for their ability to guide OTs in selecting the appropriate technology for remote home-safety evaluations. When a caregiver is capable of adhering to a strict remote evaluation protocol, a camera can be the simpler application, but a telepresence robot’s video conferencing capabilities allow for real-time interactions and the ability to obtain information from the residents about features of the home.
Primary Author and Speaker: Mi Jung Lee
Contributing Authors: Gail Castaneda, Sergio Romero
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare two state-of-the-art technologies (Store-and-Forward Videos vs. Telepresence Robots) to guide occupational therapists (OTs) in selecting the appropriate technology for remote home safety evaluations.
DESIGN: Qualitative study. For the video applications, 36 caregivers and two OTs were recruited from the Inpatient Geriatric Evaluation and Management (GEM) unit at the Gainesville, FL VA Medical Center. For the robot applications, five OTs and five remote assistants were recruited from local rehabilitation facilities and clinical referrals in Gainesville, Florida.
METHOD: Five categories (1) area coverage; 2) error correction; 3) usability; 4) cybersecurity; and 5) network connections) were assessed to compare advantages and disadvantages of the two methods, resulting in comparative rankings by our research team based on the two study results. The study, “Eyes behind the Video Camera,” examined how caregivers can use a video camera to record their home environment for later evaluation by an OT. For this study, the researchers utilized a low technology camera. Study participants video recorded house features (e.g., front door width) and OTs then evaluated the home through the video. In another study, our team used a telepresence robot (Double Robotics Inc.) to conduct a remote home safety evaluation. In this study, OTs remotely drove a robot through the Gator Tech Smart House to perform safety evaluations; When needed, the therapists, also interviewed caregivers in the home through the real-time conferencing feature in the robot.
RESULTS: 1.Area coverage (Camera > Robot). While the camera did not have any area restrictions, the robot was limited to indoor use.
2.Error correction (Camera < Robot). When a caregiver did not strictly follow our protocol, OTs could not effectively perform home safety evaluations. However, with the robot, therapists could resolve issues immediately through real-time conferencing with caregivers.
3.Usability (Camera = Robot). Driving the robot was difficult for some OTs. However, the camera required no training for the OTs, but instead, caregivers had to be trained and guided to properly use the video cameras to record the features of their homes.
4.Cybersecurity (Camera = Robot). Videos included the patient home environment and occasional facial exposures. To protect patient privacy, the video footage and recording were carefully planned to avoid exposing any private information. Similar to the cameras, the team performed program security checks of the Robot’s teleconferencing program that transmitted patient information. This indicated that both methods require strict privacy protection policies before using them.
5.Network connections (Camera > Robot). While using the camera did not require any network connections, using the robot required a stable wireless network connection. Without a stable network, driving the robot and communicating with the caregiver were not feasible.
CONCLUSION: When a caregiver strictly follows the evaluation protocol, camera recordings may be more widely applicable for performing home safety evaluations in a greater range of environmental conditions. However, a telepresence robot’s real-time video capabilities allow for obtaining clarification and usage information that can potentially lead to a more comprehensive assessment of the home environment through correcting and clarifying limiting conditions.
IMPACT STATEMENT: By selecting and using the most appropriate remote technology to conduct a home safety evaluation, OTs can improve access to this important intervention that has been shown to improve home independence, decrease the risk of falling and improve the overall quality of life.
References
Romero, S., Lee, M., Simic, I., Levy, C., & Sanford, J. (2017). Development and validation of a remote home safety protocol. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 13(2), 166-172, https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2017.1300345
Work from anywhere. (2018, December 2). Retrieved from https://www.doublerobotics.com/
