Cited by 80Social Robot Interaction and HRITechnology Use by Older AdultsProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics

Lessons learned from the deployment of a long-term autonomous robot as companion in physical therapy for older adults with dementia a mixed methods study

Hebesberger, Denise, Koertner, Tobias, Gisinger, Christoph, Pripfl, Juergen, Dondrup, Christian·2016·2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)

Abstract

The eldercare sector is a promising deployment area for robotics where robots can support staff and help to bridge the predicted staff-shortage. A requirement analysis showed that one field of robot-deployment could be supporting physical therapy of older adults with advanced dementia. To explore this possibility, a long-term autonomous robot was deployed as a walking group assistant at a care site for the first time. The robot accompanied two weekly walking groups for a month, offering visual and acoustic stimulation. Therapists' experience, the robot's influence on the dynamic of the group and the therapists' estimation of the robot's utility were assessed by a mixed methods design consisting of observations, interviews and rating scales. Findings suggest that a robot has the potential to enhance motivation, group coherence and also mood within the walking group. Furthermore, older adults show curiosity and openness towards the robot. However, robustness and reliability of the system must be high, otherwise technical problems quickly turn the robot from a useful assistant into a source of additional workload and exhaustion for therapists.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/hri.2016.7451730

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • [33] revealed some Design failures that led to iterative improvements between annual deployments.

    “For instance, [33] revealed some of the Design failures that lead to the iterative improvements between annual deployments.”
  • Other probability scores are much harder to obtain in a post-mortem analysis of long-term deployment and require more focused studies involving users directly.

    “The other probability scores are much harder to obtain in a post-mortem analysis of long-term deployment, and require more focused studies, e.g.[33], involving the users directly.”
  • Impact assessment was based on qualitative analysis in the context of the care deployment within the STRANDS project.

    “To assess the impact of individual failures, we base our assessment of a qualitative analysis in the context of the care deployment within the STRANDS project [24,33,34].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hebesberger, D., Koertner, T., Gisinger, C., Pripfl, J., & Dondrup, C.
Affiliations
  • Akademie für Altersforschung am Haus der Barmherzigkeit (AT)
  • Universität für Weiterbildung Krems (AT)
  • University of Lincoln (GB)
Venue
2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2016-03
Pages
27-34
OpenAlex
W4251569456
Cited by
79
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4
FWCI
12.37
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Keywords
companion robots, physiotherapy, dementia, older adults, walking groups, therapist workload, group dynamics, motivation, robot acceptance, staff shortage

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review