The Challenge of Coming to Terms with the Use of a New Digital Assistive Device: A Case Study of Two Persons with Mild Dementia
Open accessAbstract
There is an increased interest in supporting persons with dementia with technical services in daily life. The aim of this case study was to explore the complex issues involved in the process from a user driven development to the acceptance and usage of a new digital assistive device for persons with mild dementia. Even though it was developed in a user driven process and personalized to meet their individual needs they rarely used it. To deepening the understanding of this disparity between actual usage and perceived usefulness, the participants were studied whilst performing daily life activities through participant observations and interviews. Their partners were interviewed two years after the first observations to clarify the change in needs over time. The results show that the participant needs encompassed occupation, safety, social interaction, and memory support together with the receipt of general support. The overriding requirement for both participants was a need to maintain their self-image. When the digital assistive device did not correspond with the participants’ expectations or view of themselves, their interest in using it faded, since the digital assistive device failed to support their self-image. The acceptance of a digital assistive device by a person with dementia is a process that begins with identifying and personalizing the functions of the device according to individual needs, and then supporting the usage and the gradual integration of the device into daily life. During this process, the person’s self-image must be taken into consideration and supported.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Seven studies reported that technology was neither accepted nor adhered to.
“Seven studies reported that technology was neither accepted nor adhered to [22, 25, 26, 28, 39, 40, 48].”
From Acceptance and use of innovative assistive technologies among people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers: a systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as [28]
The progression of the disease, and the onset of more severe symptoms, negatively affected adherence to IAT.
“Regarding clinical factors, the progression of the disease, and the onset of more severe symptoms, was found to negatively affect adherence to IAT [28]”
From Acceptance and use of innovative assistive technologies among people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers: a systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as [28]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 49 · Cited by 30
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- [5]Fortin J Kim Hesook S Kollak I Human needs and nursing theory In: Ed Nursing theories: Conceptual and philosophical Foundation 2005 2nd New York, NY, USA Springer Publishing Company 10 26
- [13]Östlund B Topo P Topo P Östlund B Conclusions: Time to get involved! Dementia, Design and Technology 2009 IOS Amsterdam, Press 141 6
- [24]Quinn PM Qualitative Research & Evaluations Methods 2002 3rd California Sage Publications Inc
- [39]Nygård L Topo P Östlund B Living with dementia and the challenges of domestic technology In: Eds Dementia, Design and Technology Dementia, Design and Technology 2009 IOS Amsterdam, Press 9 25
- [40]Sabat SR The experience of Alzheimer’s disease Life trough a tangled veil 2001 Oxford Blackwell Publisher Ltd
- [46]Rauhala M Topo P Östlund B Ethical councelling as a working method in designing technology for people with dementia Dementia, Design and Technology 2009 IOS Amsterdam, Press 97 110
- [47]Froggatt A Gearing B Johnsson M Heller I Self-awareness in early dementia Mental health problems in old age 1988 Buckingham Open University Press 131 6
- Authors
- Karlsson, E., Axelsson, K., Zingmark, K., & Sävenstedt, S.
- Affiliations
- Luleå University of Technology (SE)
- ORCID
- Zingmark, Karin
- Venue
- The Open Nursing Journal
- Publisher
- Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
- Published
- 2011-11-04
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 102-110
- ISSN
- 1874-4346 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3227864
- OpenAlex
- W2108014299
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3
- FWCI
- 6.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Open Nursing Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- European Commission
- Luleå Tekniska Universitet
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Keywords
- mild dementia, technology acceptance, user-driven development, self-image, memory support, safety, social interaction, personalized technology
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