Study | Aim of the study | Reported outcomes | Facilitators | Barriers |
---|---|---|---|---|
Stroetmann and Erkert 1999 [54] | To provide the capability for frail older people to live independently | The system was rated positively, impact on quality of life of the participants | Feeling of being in power over technology. Easy-to-use remote- control unit. Possibility for direct help, if needed | The system was not completely reliable. Technical problems |
Marcellini et al. 2000 [43] | To examine the use of ticket machines, automatic teller machines and telephone cards by older people | The use of these technologies is low. Age is most important predictor factor of using the machines. Younger participants feel that such technology makes life easier | Technology makes life easier. Both social support and lack of social support. Easy to use technology | Technology makes life more difficult. Low education |
Perle 2012 [51] | To compare the habits of older people and young people in using internet | Older persons had more specific problems (related to insufficient knowledge of the structure of the web and computer) than younger | Experienced older person teach other older people. User-friendly web-design. Repeated practice gives skills and confidence. | Knowledge is insufficient. No appropriate training. Teachers are too quick. Difficulties with new systems. |
Wessmann et al. 2013 [53] | To investigate how older people experience the use of technology | No link was found between technology and quality of life. Age was related to the use of technology. There was a clear link between technology usage and level of education | High education. Younger age. More experience with technology. Financial benefit Safety factor Communication with family and friends | Low education. No need to use technology. Expensive. Need assistants when use it. Functional limitations due to age |
Zsiga et al. 2013 [44] | To collect the opinions of the participants about the robot | Robot has potential to be useful for older individuals. Communication with the robot should be better. The robot helps to compensate memory loss | Gain a companion. Robot providing physical help in tasks. Robot sending an alarm signal. Providing reminder function. Video connection. Companionship. | Robot`s camera might not respect their private life. The design of the device. It cannot replace people. Hard to understand. |
La Tona et al. 2017 [55] | To validate the developed interfaces of robot | Good users` feeling towards the interfaces. The voice interference and alarm were found useful, while web pages and touch-screens commands were less appreciated | People can be monitored. Robot makes people more autonomous. Robot can monitor room and gives vocal feedback | Touchscreens are difficult to use. Difficulties remembering the commands. Robots appearance is unnatural |
Adamsoo 2018 [52] | To find out what are older peoples` main concerns about using smartphones | Coping with digital devices is significantly affected by English language skills, high screen sensitivity, small text size, clumsiness of hands. | Technology gives a sense of security, contact with family, independence, helps to reach help. Help from family about how to use the device. The device is practical | No need for innovations. Memory difficulties. Device is too fast, small or expensive. Inaccurate motor skills. Little practice |