Abstract
Abstract
Background
Despite the great benefits of intelligent assistive technology (IAT) for dementia care – for example, the enhanced safety and increased independence of people with dementia and their caregivers – its practical adoption is still limited. The social and ethical issues pertaining to IAT in dementia care, shaped by factors such as culture, may explain these limitations. However, most studies have focused on understanding these issues within one cultural setting only. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore and compare the attitudes of Israeli and German dementia experts toward IAT in dementia care, to contribute to a more cultural-comparative perspective.
Methods
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 35 experts (15 Israelis and 20 Germans) in key roles in health and community services for people with dementia as well as in the fields of dementia and IAT (e.g., computer science, electrical/biomedical engineering, ethics, nursing, and gerontology). Thematic content analysis was used to analyze the data.
Findings
Israeli and German experts identified the same social accelerators in the development and implementation of IAT in dementia care (i.e., changes in family structure and social digitization) and benefits of adopting IAT (e.g., enhancing the safety of people with dementia and increasing their independence). However, there were differences in inhibitor/risk assessments between the two groups. Namely, economic considerations and the cognitive capacity of people with dementia were identified by both groups as inhibitors, while Israeli experts additionally reported stigma and ageism. Whereas both groups agreed that IAT might reduce human connection, and that the technology is not yet reliable enough, German experts highlighted concerns regarding privacy; in contrast, Israeli experts prioritized safety over privacy.
Conclusions
Our research findings allow for the identification of relevant similarities but also important differences between German and Israeli experts’ perspectives. As such, an important basis has been provided for a more in-depth discussion regarding where, why, and how culturally-sensitive technology development is needed.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference63 articles.
1. Dada S, van der Walt C, May AA, Murray J. Intelligent assistive technology devices for persons with dementia: a scoping review. Assist Technol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2021.1992540.
2. The European commission’s high-level expert group on artificial intelligence. A definition of AI: Main capabilities and scientific disciplines. 2018. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/system/files/ged/ai_hleg_definition_of_ai_18_december_1.pdf.
3. Ienca M, Jotterand F, Bernice E, Maurizio C, Alessandro SP, Reto K, Tenzin W. Intelligent assistive technology for Alzheimer’s Disease and other dementias: a systematic review. J Alzheimers Dis. 2017;56(4):1301–40. https://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-161037.
4. Gagnon-Roy M, Bourget A, Stocco S, Courchesne A, Kuhne N, Provencher V. Assistive Technology addressing Safety issues in dementia: a scoping review. Am J Occup Ther. 2017;71(5):7105190020p1–10. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2017.025817.
5. Ghafurian M, Hoey J, Dautenhahn K. Social robots for the care of persons withdementia: a systematic review. ACM Trans Hum Robot Interact. 2019;10(4):1–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3469653.