ATHENE : Assistive technologies for healthy living in elders : needs assessment by ethnography

Numerous assistive technologies to support independent living –including personal alarms, mobile phones, self-monitoring devices, mobility aids, software apps and home adaptations –have been developed over the years, but their uptake by older people, especially those from minority ethnic groups, is poor. This paper outlines the ways in which the ATHENE project seeks to redress this situation by producing a richer understanding of the complex and diverse living experiences and care needs of older people and exploring how industry, the NHS, social services and third sector can work with the older people themselves to ‘co-produce’ useful and useable ALT designs to meet their needs. In this paper, we provide an overview of the project methodology and discuss some of the issues it raises for the design and development process

Hidden work and the challenges of scalability and sustainability in ambulatory assisted living

Assisted living technologies may help people live independently while also—potentially—reducing health and care costs. But they are notoriously difficult to implement at scale and many devices are abandoned following initial adoption.We report findings from a study of global positioning system (GPS) tracking devices intended to support the independent living of people with cognitive impairment. Our aims were threefold: to understand (through ethnography) such individuals’ lived experience of GPS tracking; to facilitate (through action research) the customization and adaptation of technologies and care services to provide effective, ongoing support; and to explore the possibilities for a co-production methodology that would enable people with cognitive impairment and their families to work with professionals and technical designers to shape these devices and services to meet their particular needs in a sustainable way.We found that the articulation work needed for maintaining the GPS technology in “working order” was extensive and ongoing. This articulation work does not merely supplement formal procedures, a lot of it is needed to get round them, but it is also often invisible and thus its importance goes largely unrecognized. If GPS technologies are to be implemented at scale and sustainably, methods must be found to capitalize on the skills and tacit knowledge held within the care network (professional and lay) to resolve problems, improve device design, devise new service solutions, and foster organizational learning

The ATHENE project:the importance of bricolage in personalising assisted living technologies

Introduction: An aging population is fueling interest in assisted living technologies (ALTs) to support independence at home. Numerous ALTs have been developed and deployed, but uptake and use has fallen short of levels predicted by policymakers. A key reason is a lack of understanding of users’ needs. In this paper we report findings from the ATHENE (Assistive Technologies for Healthy Living in Elders: Needs Assessment by Ethnography) project, which is funded by the Technology Strategy Board under its Assisted Living Innovation Platform programme. The project aims to produce a richer understanding of the lived experiences and needs of older people and explore how ALT stakeholders – suppliers, health and social care providers – can work with users and carers to ‘coproduce’ ALTs. We focus, in particular, on the role of ‘bricolage’ (pragmatic customisation, combining new with legacy devices) by informal carers, such as family members, in enabling ALTs to be personalised to individual needs. Bricolage allows users and family members to take the initiative in ‘coproducing’ ALTs. that making assisted living work relies on collaboration, involving not only formal carers, but also informal ones. We argue that a new research agenda is needed, focusing on solving challenges of involving users and their informal carers in the straightforward and dependable co-production of ALTs

Infrastructure revisited : an ethnographic case study of how health information infrastructure shapes and constrains technological innovation

Background: Star defined infrastructure as something other things “run on”; it consists mainly of “boring things.” Building on her classic 1999 paper, and acknowledging contemporary developments in technologies, services, and systems, we developed a new theorization of health information infrastructure with five defining characteristics: (1) a material scaffolding, backgrounded when working and foregrounded upon breakdown; (2) embedded, relational, and emergent; (3) collectively learned, known, and practiced (through technologically-supported cooperative work and organizational routines); (4) patchworked (incrementally built and fixed) and path-dependent (influenced by technical and socio-cultural legacies); and (5) institutionally supported and sustained (eg, embodying standards negotiated and overseen by regulatory and professional bodies). Objective: Our theoretical objective was, in a health care context, to explore what information infrastructure is and how it shapes, supports, and constrains technological innovation. Our empirical objective was to examine the challenges of implementing and scaling up video consultation services. Methods: In this naturalistic case study, we collected a total of 450 hours of ethnographic observations, over 100 interviews, and about 100 local and national documents over 54 months. Sensitized by the characteristics of infrastructure, we sought examples of infrastructural challenges that had slowed implementation and scale-up. We arranged data thematically to gain familiarity before undertaking an analysis informed by strong structuration, neo-institutional, and social practice theories, together with elements taken from the actor-network theory. Results: We documented scale-up challenges at three different sites in our original case study, all of which relate to “boring things”: the selection of a platform to support video-mediated consultations, the replacement of desktop computers with virtual desktop infrastructure profiles, and problems with call quality. In a fourth subcase, configuration issues with licensed video-conferencing software limited the spread of the innovation to another UK site. In all four subcases, several features of infrastructure were evident, including: (1) intricacy and lack of dependability of the installed base; (2) interdependencies of technologies, processes, and routines, such that a fix for one problem generated problems elsewhere in the system; (3) the inertia of established routines; (4) the constraining (and, occasionally, enabling) effect of legacy systems; and (5) delays and conflicts relating to clinical quality and safety standards. Conclusions: Innovators and change agents who wish to introduce new technologies in health services and systems should: (1) attend to materiality (eg, expect bugs and breakdowns, and prioritize basic dependability over advanced functionality); (2) take a systemic and relational view of technologies (versus as an isolated tool or function); (3) remember that technology-supported work is cooperative and embedded in organizational routines, which are further embedded in other routines; (4) innovate incrementally, taking account of technological and socio-cultural legacies; (5) consider standards but also where these standards come from and what priorities and interests they represent; and (6) seek to create leeway for these standards to be adapted to different local conditions

What matters to older people with assisted living needs? A phenomenological analysis of the use and non-use of telehealth and telecare

Telehealth and telecare research has been dominated by efficacy trials. The field lacks a sophisticated theorisation of [a] what matters to older people with assisted living needs; [b] how illness affects people's capacity to use technologies; and [c] the materiality of assistive technologies. We sought to develop a phenomenologically and socio-materially informed theoretical model of assistive technology use. Forty people aged 60–98 (recruited via NHS, social care and third sector) were visited at home several times in 2011–13. Using ethnographic methods, we built a detailed picture of participants' lives, illness experiences and use (or non-use) of technologies. Data were analysed phenomenologically, drawing on the work of Heidegger, and contextualised using a structuration approach with reference to Bourdieu's notions of habitus and field. We found that participants' needs were diverse and unique. Each had multiple, mutually reinforcing impairments (e.g. tremor and visual loss and stiff hands) that were steadily worsening, culturally framed and bound up with the prospect of decline and death. They managed these conditions subjectively and experientially, appropriating or adapting technologies so as to enhance their capacity to sense and act on their world. Installed assistive technologies met few participants' needs; some devices had been abandoned and a few deliberately disabled. Successful technology arrangements were often characterised by ‘bricolage’ (pragmatic customisation, combining new with legacy devices) by the participant or someone who knew and cared about them. With few exceptions, the current generation of so-called ‘assisted living technologies’ does not assist people to live with illness. To overcome this irony, technology providers need to move beyond the goal of representing technology users informationally (e.g. as biometric data) to providing flexible components from which individuals and their carers can ‘think with things’ to improve the situated, lived experience of multi-morbidity. A radical revision of assistive technology design policy may be needed

Analysing the role of complexity in explaining the fortunes of technology programmes : Empirical application of the NASSS framework

© The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.Background: Failures and partial successes are common in technology-supported innovation programmes in health and social care. Complexity theory can help explain why. Phenomena may be simple (straightforward, predictable, few components), complicated (multiple interacting components or issues) or complex (dynamic, unpredictable, not easily disaggregated into constituent components). The recently published NASSS framework applies this taxonomy to explain Non-adoption or Abandonment of technology by individuals and difficulties achieving Scale-up, Spread and Sustainability. This paper reports the first empirical application of the NASSS framework. Methods: Six technology-supported programmes were studied using ethnography and action research for up to 3 years across 20 health and care organisations and 10 national-level bodies. They comprised video outpatient consultations, GPS tracking technology for cognitive impairment, pendant alarm services, remote biomarker monitoring for heart failure, care organising software and integrated case management via data warehousing. Data were collected at three levels: micro (individual technology users), meso (organisational processes and systems) and macro (national policy and wider context). Data analysis and synthesis were guided by socio-technical theories and organised around the seven NASSS domains: (1) the condition or illness, (2) the technology, (3) the value proposition, (4) the adopter system (professional staff, patients and lay carers), (5) the organisation(s), (6) the wider (institutional and societal) system and (7) interaction and mutual adaptation among all these domains over time. Results: The study generated more than 400 h of ethnographic observation, 165 semi-structured interviews and 200 documents. The six case studies raised multiple challenges across all seven domains. Complexity was a common feature of all programmes. In particular, individuals' health and care needs were often complex and hence unpredictable and 'off algorithm'. Programmes in which multiple domains were complicated proved difficult, slow and expensive to implement. Those in which multiple domains were complex did not become mainstreamed (or, if mainstreamed, did not deliver key intended outputs). Conclusion: The NASSS framework helped explain the successes, failures and changing fortunes of this diverse sample of technology-supported programmes. Since failure is often linked to complexity across multiple NASSS domains, further research should systematically address ways to reduce complexity and/or manage programme implementation to take account of it.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

The day-to-day co-production of ageing in place

We report findings from a study that set out to explore the experience of older people living with assisted living technologies and care services. We find that successful ‘ageing in place’ is socially and collaboratively accomplished – ‘co-produced’ – day-to-day by the efforts of older people, and their formal and informal networks of carers (e.g. family, friends, neighbours). First, we reveal how ‘bricolage’ allows care recipients and family members to customise assisted living technologies to individual needs. We argue that making customisation easier through better design must be part of making assisted living technologies ‘work’. Second, we draw attention to the importance of formal and informal carers establishing and maintaining mutual awareness of the older person’s circumstances day-to-day so they can act in a concerted and coordinated way when problems arise. Unfortunately, neither the design of most current assisted living technologies, nor the ways care services are typically configured, acknowledges these realities of ageing in place. We conclude that rather than more ‘advanced’ technologies, the success of ageing in place programmes will depend on effortful alignments in the technical, organisational and social configuration of support