JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Active Assisted Living (AAL) refers to systems designed to improve quality of life, aid in independence, and create healthier lifestyles for those who need assistance at any stage of their lives. As the population of older adults in Canada grows, there is a pressing need for non-intrusive, continuous, adaptable, and reliable health monitoring tools to support aging in place and reduce healthcare costs. AAL has great potential to support these efforts with the wide variety of solutions currently available, but additional work is required to address the concerns of care recipients and their care providers with regards to the integration of AAL into care.

Objective:

The study aimed to work closely with stakeholders to ensure that recommendations for system-service integrations for AAL aligned with the needs and capacity of the healthcare and allied-health systems. To that end, an exploratory study was conducted to understand perceptions of and concerns with AAL technology use.

Methods:

18 semi-structured group interviews were held with stakeholders, with each group comprising several participants from the same organization. These were categorized as (1) care organizations, (2) technology development organizations, (3) technology integration organizations, and (4) potential care recipient or patient advocacy groups. The results from interviews were coded using a thematic analysis to identify future steps and opportunities regarding AAL.

Results:

Participants discussed how use of AAL systems may lead to improved support for care recipients through more comprehensive monitoring and alerting, greater confidence in aging-in-place, and increased care recipient empowerment and access to care. However, they also raised concerns regarding the management and monetization of data emerging from AAL systems, as well as general accountability and liability. Lastly, participants discussed potential barriers for the use and implementation of AAL systems, especially addressing the conviction of whether AAL systems are even worth it considering the investment required and encroachment on privacy. Other barriers raised included issues with the institutional decision-making process and equity.

Conclusions:

Better definition of roles is needed in terms of who can access the data and who is responsible for acting on the gathered data. It is important for stakeholders to understand the trade-off between using AAL technologies in care settings and their costs, including loss of patient privacy and control. Finally, further work is needed to address the gaps, to explore the equity in AAL access, and to develop a data governance framework for AAL in the continuum of care.