Ageing Australians welcome tech at home
Older people and carers accept that enhanced safety, independence, and an ability to live at home for longer would be welcome benefits from technology-supported care at home.
Researchers have found that if older Australians are permitted to stay at home and age, they would be willing to allow government-funded technology into their abode.
These are among early findings of an Australian-first national survey drawing on the attitudes of 1,000 older Australians, their families and carers.
Led by the UTS Institute for Sustainable Futures in collaboration with the NSW Smart Sensing Network and the University of Newcastle’s FASTLab and funded by the Sydney Partnership for Health, Education, Research and Enterprise, the outcomes from the survey are hoped to inform existing initiatives across academia, industry, and the NSW state and federal governments.
Five NSW universities, three NSW Local Health Districts and 10 Australian innovation companies were involved in the survey, which explored technology-supported care at home and the vital role it played in assisting with aged care and taking pressure away from the health system.
FASTLab founder and director Professor Paul Egglestone said it was evident from the results that seniors support technology.
“Older Australians are ready to use technology that empowers them to stay at home longer,” Mr Egglestone said.
“This data will guide how we roll out these solutions to keep people independent while easing the burden on our healthcare system.”
Findings from the survey also highlight that technology that can detect or alert a carer or family member about an emergency, such as a fall, are the most valued to the public.
UTS Institute for Sustainable Futures, Professor Jason Prior said that although technology-supported care in the home is appealing to participants for enhancing safety, independence, and an ability to live at home for longer, their “acceptance of technology-supported care at home is nuanced” with varying levels of engagement and some “reservations” and cautiousness.
“While technology-supported care was valued by many participants in emergencies and for extending independent living, privacy concerns were also evident for many,” Mr Prior said.
“While the cost of these technologies was a concern for many participants, many also indicated that they were willing to pay varying amounts for the technologies.”
NSSN Human Health lead Catherine Oates Smith said sensor-driven alert systems powered by AI and data have the potential to lower fall incidents among frail and elderly individuals considerably, most notably at nighttime.
“These systems can generate both preventative and emergency alerts, complementing the care provided to older adults, and may also incorporate telehealth services,” she said.
“This ecosystem approach helps ease the burden on caregivers by reducing the need for frequent in-person checks, enabling elderly individuals to remain safely at home, whatever home means for them, while reducing pressure on our busy hospitals.”
The preliminary results, where were released last Friday at the NSSN’s 3rd Ageing Forum at NSW Parliament House, arrive as the federal government and opposition agreed to aged care reforms to help ease the weight of Australia’s swiftly ageing population.
The final survey results will be published next year with a plan to launch a real-world trial of technology in older people’s homes.
Comment on the story below. Follow Australian Ageing Agenda on LinkedIn and Facebook, sign up to our twice-weekly newsletter and subscribe to AAA magazine for the complete aged care picture.
As an informal carer of two loved ones who reside in separate homes, one of my very first undertakings was to purchase and install smart home devices (having given up a professional career in IT&T).
At the time I chose Google smart devices that included display hub, intelligent cameras, mini’s (multiple) and the smart carbon and smoke detection alarms that also provide sensory path lighting.
At the time I knew it would provide some assistance, however could not have foreseen the ongoing and increasing levels of support and assistance in everyday life. There were also substantial benefits to ensuring that all equipment was compatible and had the capability to connect to the overall solution. The benefits are mind blowing and for those without technological skills or equipment such as laptops or tablets, it does open up a world of possibilities and opportunities.
The area I would have an objection to is around companies managing the access and aspects of the equipment that could easily breach privacy and be seen and used that would, without doubt, feel unreasonably invasive regardless of the invaluable benefits including protection and prevention. If that was restricted to mere reporting but not imagery or restricted based on individual preferences of what can and can’t be accessed by outside influences then maybe more would consider it.
Currently recommendations and rules from aged care providers are based on antiquated technology that do not form a coherent solution and only address a single health or disability issues. There is little understanding or want to understand where those recommendations only address to the complexity of everyday living and can cause more stress based on different operating conditions and knowledge required for each.
Eg: pendant worn to assist in the event of a fall that requires someone to not have lost consciousness and able to press the pendant on the button. In most instances the free service only provides coverage around the home and contact conducted by a call centre. Each morning my loved one has an assigned time to conduct a daily test. That is currently 6am as it requires a person to be available when the test is conducted. My loved one must wake up at this time for this test, why?? There is technology that is miles ahead and provides substancially more coverage and more benefits I could list here! To add, if that test is not conducted (slept in or other more serious issue) as the first person on the call list, I’m not contacted until 11am and even as late as 3pm that day. When contacted, I don’t then need to jump in my car to go physically check on them as I access the cameras remotely and it gives me a real time view and any motion reported. I can then confirm over the phone that all is well. I am not able to jump in the car for physical check at the drop of a hat so this provides peace of mind for me and my loved one as well as an ability to implement actions immediately.