Human centred design considerations for connected health devices for the older adult

Journal of Personalized Medicine

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 245-281

  Harte, Richard P ^a   Glynn, Liam G ^a   Broderick, Barry J ^a   Rodriguez Molinero, Alejandro ^a,b   Baker, Paul M A ^c   McGuiness, Bernadette ^a   O'Sullivan, Leonard ^d   Diaz, Marta ^b   Quinlan, Leo R ^a   ÓLaighin, Gearóid ^a  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

^b UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^c GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Ageing adult; eHealth; Elderly; Human computer interaction; Human factors; Human centred design; Medical devices; Usability; User acceptance; User experience

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT; AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; AUDITORY FEEDBACK; BLOOD GLUCOSE METER; COGNITIVE PERFORMANCE; COMPUTERIZED PROVIDER ORDER ENTRY; CONNECTED HEALTH DEVICE; ELECTRONIC SPIROMETER; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEARING AID ANALYSIS SYSTEM; HUMAN; HUMAN CENTERED DESIGN; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; INTERACTIVE VOICE RESPONSE SYSTEM; MEDICAL DEVICE; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; PEDOMETER; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RANGE OF MOTION; REVIEW; SENIOR TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL; SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE; TELEHEALTH; TELEMEDICINE; THERMOMETER; VISUAL ACUITY TESTING EQUIPMENT; VISUAL DISPLAY UNIT;

EID: 84940999503     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20754426     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/jpm4020245     Document Type: Review

References (81)

1. Rubin, J.; Chisnell, D. Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2008.
2. Gould, J.D.; Lewis, C. Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. Commun. ACM 1985, 28, 300-311.
3. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9241SO10:2010-Ergonomics of human-system interaction-Part 210: Human-Centred Design for Interactive Systems; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2010.
4. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9241SO1: Guidance on Usability (1998); ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1998.
5. AAMI/American National Standard. ANSI/AAMI HE75:2009-Human Factors Engineering-Design of Medical Devices; AAMI: Arlington, VA, USA, 2010.
6. Bevan, N. International standards for usability should be more widely used. J. Usability Stud. 2009, 4, 106-113.
7. Kushniruk, A.W.; Triola, M.M.; Borycki, E.M.; Stein, B.; Kannry, J.L. Technology induced error and usability: The relationship between usability problems and prescription errors when using a handheld application. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2005, 74, 519-526.
8. Han, Y.Y.; Carcillo, J.A.; Venkataraman, S.T.; Clark, R.S.B.; Watson, R.S.; Nguyen, T.C.; Bayir, H.; Orr, R.A. Unexpected increased mortality after implementation of a commercially sold computerized physician order entry system. Pediatrics 2005, 116, 1506-1512.
9. Ash, J.S.; Berg, M.; Coiera, E. Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: The nature of patient care information system-related errors. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2004, 11, 104-112.
10. Campbell, E.M.; Sittig, D.F.; Ash, J.S.; Guappone, K.P.; Dykstra, R.H. Types of unintended consequences related to computerized provider order entry. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13, 547-556.
11. FDA. Medical Device Recalls-Touchscreen for Hospira Symbiq Infusion System, Models 16026 and 16027; FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2012.
12. US Food and Drug Administration. Applying Human Factors and Usability Engineering to Optimize Medical Device Design; FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2011.
13. Bogan, D.; Donnelly, P.; Spence, J. Connected Health: An All Island Review in Ireland; Bio Business: Belfast, Ireland, 2010.
14. Geisenger Health. Geisenger Health Plan: Telemonitoring. Available online: http://www.hhnmag.com/ inc-hhn/pdfs/ATTgate_aug2013.pdf (accessed on 17 May 2014).
15. US Census Bureau. Global Population Profile: 2002. International Population Reports WP/02; US Census Bureau, Washington, MD, USA, 2002.
16. United Nations Economic and Social Affairs. World Population Ageing 2009; United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division: New York City, NY, USA, 2009.
17. UN: Department of Economic and Social Affairs. World Population Ageing: 195095050; UN: New York, NY, USA, 2009.
18. Fortin, M.; Bravo, G.; Hudon, C.; Vanasse, A.; Lapointe, L. Prevalence of multimorbidity among adults seen in family practice. Ann. Fam. Med. 2005, 3, 223-228.
19. Hooyman, N.R.; Kiyak, H.A. Social Gerontology: A Multidisciplinary Perspective; Pearson Education: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2008.
20. Slawinski, E.B.; Hartel, D.M.; Kline, D.W. Self-reported hearing problems in daily life throughout adulthood. Psychol. Aging 1993, 8, 552-561.
21. Brabyn, J.; Schneck, M.; Haegerstrom-Portnoy, G.; Lott, L. The Smith-Kettlewell Institute (SKI) longitudinal study of vision function and its impact among the elderly: An overview. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2001, 78, 264-269.
22. Fisk, A.D.; Rogers, W.A. Individual differences, aging, and human factors: An overview; In Handbook of Human Factors and the Older Adult; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 1997; pp. 151-170.
23. Barrientos, A.; Gorman, M.; Heslop, A. Old age poverty in developing countries: Contributions and dependence in later life. World Dev. 2003, 31, 555-570.
24. Glynn, L.G.; Valderas, J.M. The prevalence of multimorbidity in primary care and its effect on health care utilization and cost. Fam. Pract. 2011, 28, 1-8.
25. Hurling, R.; Catt, M.; Boni, M.D.; Fairley, B.W.; Hurst, T.; Murray, P.; Richardson, A.; Sodhi, J.S. Using internet and mobile phone technology to deliver an automated physical activity program: Randomized controlled trial. J. Med. Internet Res. 2007, 9, e7.
26. Intille, S.S. A new research challenge: Persuasive technology to motivate healthy aging. IEEE Trans. Inf. Technol. Biomed. 2004, 8, 235-237.
27. De Blok, B.M.J.; de Greef, M.H.G.; Hacken, N.H.T.; Sprenger, S.R.; Postema, K.; Wempe, J.B. The effects of a lifestyle physical activity counseling program with feedback of a pedometer during pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with COPD: A pilot study. Patient Educ. Couns. 2006, 61, 48-55.
28. Culhane, K.M.; O'Connor, M.; Lyons, D.; Lyons, G.M. Accelerometers in rehabilitation medicine for older adults. Age Ageing 2005, 34, 556-560.
29. Hawthorn, D. Interface design and engagement with older people. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2007, 26, 333-341.
30. Scherer, M.J. Assessing the benefits of using assistive technologies and other supports for thinking, remembering and learning. Disabil. Rehabil. 2005, 27, 731-739.
31. Thielke, S.; Harniss, M.; Thompson, H.; Patel, S.; Demiris, G.; Johnson, K. Maslow's hierarchy of human needs and the adoption of health-related technologies for older adults. Ageing Int. 2012, 37, 470-488.
32. Sackmann, R.; Winkler, O. Technology generations revisited: The internet generation. Gerontechnology 2013, 11, 493-503.
33. Charness, N.; Demiris, G.; Krupinski, E.A. Designing Telehealth for an Aging Population: A Human Factors Perspective; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FA, USA, 2011.
34. Gates, G.A.; Cooper, J.C. Incidence of hearing decline in the elderly. Acta Oto-Laryngol. 1991, 111, 240-248.
35. Mitchell, P.; Gopinath, B.; Wang, J.J.; McMahon, C.M.; Schneider, J.; Rochtchina, E.; Leeder, S.R. Five-year incidence and progression of hearing impairment in an older population. Ear Hear. 2011, 32, 251-257.
36. Pleis, J.R.; Lucas, J.W. Summary health statistics for US adults: National health interview survey. Vital. Health Stat. 2007, 10, 54-55.
37. Viljanen, A.; Kaprio, J.; Pyykki, I.; Sorri, M.; Pajala, S.; Kauppinen, M.; Koskenvuo, M.; Rantanen, T. Hearing as a predictor of falls and postural balance in older female twins. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2009, 64, 312-317.
38. Tay, T.; Wang, J.J.; Kifley, A.; Lindley, R.; Newall, P.; Mitchell, P. Sensory and cognitive association in older persons: Findings from an older Australian population. Gerontology 2006, 52, 386-394.
39. Kiely, K.M.; Gopinath, B.; Mitchell, P.; Luszcz, M.; Anstey, K.J. Cognitive, health, and sociodemographic predictors of longitudinal decline in hearing acuity among older adults. J. Gerontol. Ser. A: Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2012, 67, 997-1003.
40. Wickremaratchi, M.M.; Llewelyn, J.G. Effects of ageing on touch. Postgrad. Med. J. 2006, 82, 301-304
41. Kenshalo, D.R., Sr. Somesthetic sensitivity in young and elderly humans. J. Gerontol. 1986, 41, 732-742.
42. Stevens, J.C.; Cruz, L.A. Spatial acuity of touch: Ubiquitous decline with aging revealed by repeated threshold testing. Somatosens. Motor Res. 1996, 13, 1-10.
43. Tremblay, F.; Wong, K.; Sanderson, R.; Coté, L. Tactile spatial acuity in elderly persons: Assessment with grating domes and relationship with manual dexterity. Somatosens. Motor Res. 2003, 20, 127-132.
44. Hamilton, A.; Balnave, R.; Adams, R. Grip strength testing reliability. J. Hand Ther. 1994, 7, 163-170.
45. Carmeli, E.; Patish, H.; Coleman, R. The aging hand. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2003, 58, M146-M152.
46. Rantenen, T.; Masaki, K.; Foley, D.; Izmirilan, G.; White, L.; Guralnik, J.M. Grip strength changes over 27 YR in Japanese-American men. J. Appl. Physiol. 1998, 85, 2047-2053.
47. Werle, S.; Goldhahn, J.; Drerup, S.; Simmen, B.R.; Sprott, H.; Herren, D.B. Age-and gender-specific normative data of grip and pinch strength in a healthy adult Swiss population. J. Hand Surg. 2009, 34, 76-84.
48. Ranganathan, V.K.; Siemionow, V.; Sahgal, V.; Yue, G.H. Effects of aging on hand function. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2001, 49, 1478-1484.
49. Chaparro, A.; Rogers, M.; Fernandez, J.; Bohan, M.; Choi, S.D.; Stumpfhauser, L. Range of motion of the wrist: Implications for designing computer input devices for the elderly. Disabil. Rehabil. 2000, 22, 633-637.
50. Smith, M.W.; Sharit, J.; Czaja, S.J. Aging, motor control, and the performance of computer mouse tasks. Hum. Factors 1999, 41, 389-396.
51. Badley, E.M.; Wang, P.P. Arthritis and the aging population: Projections of arthritis prevalence in Canada 1991 to 2031. J. Rheumatol. 1998, 25, 138-144.
52. Feeney, R. Specific Anthropometric and Strength Data for People with Dexterity Disability; Department of Trade and Industry: London, UK, 2002.
53. Salthouse, T.A. When does age-related cognitive decline begin? Neurobiol. Aging 2009, 30, 507-514.
54. Nilsson, L.-G.; Sternäng, O.; Rönnlund, M.; Nyberg, L. Challenging the notion of an early-onset of cognitive decline. Neurobiol. Aging 2009, 30, 521-524.
55. Scarmeas, N.; Stern, Y. Cognitive reserve and lifestyle. J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 2003, 25, 625-633.
56. Béland, F.; Zunzunegui, M.-V.; Alvarado, B.; Otero, A.; del Ser, T. Trajectories of cognitive decline and social relations. J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2005, 60, P320-P330.
57. Cullum, S.; Huppert, F.A.; McGee, M.; Dening, T.; Ahmed, A.; Paykel, E.S.; Brayne, C. Decline across different domains of cognitive function in normal ageing: Results of a longitudinal population-based study using CAMCOG. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2000, 15, 853-862.
58. Park, H.L.; O'Connell, J.E.; Thomson, R.G. A systematic review of cognitive decline in the general elderly population. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2003, 18, 1121-1134.
59. Singh-Manoux, A.; Kivimaki, M.; Glymour, M.M.; Elbaz, A.; Berr, C.; Ebmeier, K.P.; Ferrie, J.E.; Dugravot, A. Timing of onset of cognitive decline: Results from Whitehall II prospective cohort study. Br. Med. J. 2012, 344, d7622.
60. Rogers, E.M. Elements of diffusion. In Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.; Simon and Schuster: New York City, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 1-38.
61. Mitzner, T.L.; Boron, J.B.; Fausset, C.B.; Adams, A.E.; Charness, N.; Czaja, S.J.; Dijkstra, K.; Fisk, A.D.; Rogers, W.A.; Sharit, J. Older adults talk technology: Technology usage and attitudes. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 1710-1721.
62. McCreadie, C.; Tinker, A. The acceptability of assistive technology to older people. Ageing Soc. 2005, 25, 91-110.
63. Bagozzi, R.P. The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2007, 8, 244-254.
64. Lawton, M.P.; Moss, M.S.; Winter, L.; Hoffman, C. Motivation in later life: Personal projects and well-being. Psychol. Aging 2002, 17, 539-547.
65. Kim, K. The Emotional Response of Older Adults to New Technology. Available Online: https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/42369/ (accessed on 17 May 2014).
66. Czaja, S.J.; Lee, C.C. The impact of aging on access to technology. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2007, 5, 341-349.
67. Baker, P.M.A.; Bricout, J.C.; Moon, N.W.; Coughlan, B.; Pater, J. Communities of participation: A comparison of disability and aging identified groups on Facebook and LinkedIn. Telemat. Inform. 2013, 30, 22-34.
68. Gudur, R.R.; Blackler, A.L.; Popovic, V.; Mahar, D.P. Redundancy in interface design and its impact on intuitive use of a product in older users. In IASDR 2009 Rigor and Relevance in Design; Coex: Seoul, Korea, 2009; p. 209.
69. Renaud, K.; van Biljon, J. Predicting technology acceptance and adoption by the elderly: A qualitative study. In Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries, New York, NY, USA, 6 October 2008; pp. 210-219.
70. Karwowski, W.; Soares, M.M.; Stanton, N.A. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Consumer Product Design: Methods and Techniques; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2011.
71. Darroch, I.; Goodman, J.; Brewster, S.; Gray, P. The effect of age and font size on reading text on handheld computers. In Human-Computer Interaction-Interact 2005; Costabile, M.F., Paternò, F., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005; Volume 3585, pp. 253-266.
72. Karl, H.E.K.; Étienne, G. Human machine systems. In Fitting the Task to the Human: Introduction to Ergonomics, 6th ed., Taylor Francis: London, UK, 2009; pp. 157-176.
73. Stößel, C.; Wandke, H.; Blessing, L. Gestural interfaces for elderly users: Help or hindrance? In Gesture in Embodied Communication and Human-Computer Interaction; Kopp, S., Wachsmuth, I., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010; Volume 5934, pp. 269-280.
74. Kobayashi, M.; Hiyama, A.; Miura, T.; Asakawa, C.; Hirose, M.; Ifukube, T. Elderly user evaluation of mobile touchscreen interactions. In Proceedings of the 13th IFIP TC 13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Lisbon, Portugal, 5th September 2011; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; Volume Part I, pp. 83-99.
75. Jin, Z.X.; Plocher, T.; Kiff, L. Touch screen user interfaces for older adults: Button size and spacing. In Universal Access in Human Computer Interaction. Coping with Diversity; Stephanidis, C., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007; pp. 933-941.
76. International Standards Office (ISO). ISO/TS 9241SO11:2012: Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction-Part 411: Evaluation Methods for the Design of Physical Input Devices; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012.
77. Colle, H.; Hiszem, K. Standing at a kiosk: Effects of key size and spacing on touch screen numeric keypad performance and user preference. Ergonomics 2004, 47, 1406-1423.
78. Chen, K.B.; Savage, A.B.; Chourasia, A.O.; Wiegmann, D.A.; Sesto, M.E. Touch screen performance by individuals with and without motor control disabilities. Appl. Ergon. 2013, 44, 297-302.
79. Fisk, A.D. Designing for Older Adults, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2009.
80. Story, M.F. Maximizing usability: The principles of universal design. Assist. Technol. 1998, 10, 4-12.
81. Wireless Insole for Independent & Safe Elderly Living. Available online: http://www.wiisel.eu/ (accessed on 16 May 2014).