View clinical trials related to Technology.
Filter by:This study is entitled Quality of Life for Carers through a Person-Centred Technological Solution, whose acronym is TechQoL4Carers. The goal of this pilot study is to develop an innovative technological solution (TechQoL4Carers) to improve the Quality of Life (QoL), occupational balance, impact of care, self-management of health, and empowerment of informal caregivers of older people or people with disability. The main question it aims to answer is: Will the routine use of TechQoL4Carers platform have a positive impact on the daily life of informal caregivers? The study will examine these variables in a specific way: QoL, impact of care and burden, occupational balance, health self-management, and empowerment. Informal caregivers will participate in a participatory process of development, testing and validation of the technological platform TechQoL4Carers. At the beginning and end of the study, participants will be asked to answer questionnaires to capture their perspective on the central variables of the study and on the utility and usability of the technology. Then, for three months, participants will: - use TechQoL4Carers platform on their mobile phone or computer, - wear the Xiaomi Smart Band 7/8, - provide weekly reports of health and care related quality of life, - and receive personalized recommendations and training materials. At the end, they will also participate in an in-depth interview on the impact of the project on their daily activities.
The project aims to validate the evaluation indicators applicability of 9 Gerontechnology Evaluation Frameworks. The outcome is the perceived importance of the evaluation indicators described in the 9 Evaluation Frameworks. Participants will be invited to complete a questionnaire indicating the importance of the outcomes.
This study is a field trial where "Komp" is implemented and tested as part of Oslo Municipality's home care services for older adults. Komp is a "one button" communication device designed specifically for older adults who are unfamiliar with or struggle to use conventional digital technologies such as smart phones, computers, or tablets. The aim of the trial is to study the effects of increased social contact with family and care services via Komp. In a randomized design, 300 Komp units will be offered to a sample of older municipal home care service recipients. By comparing the intervention group (who are offered to test Komp for free) with the control group (who receive services as usual), the study will uncover if, on average, users of Komp 1) can live longer at home than non-users, 2) have lesser need of home care services, and 3) are happier, safer, and more socially connected.
This pilot study will investigate the feasibility of using a digital health application, Communication, Learning, Advocacy, Resources and Expertise (CLARE), in training and support of family and friends (i.e., caregivers) of older adults with Covid in home caregiving, and in their self-care. The study's mixed method, one group, pre-post design will recruit 50 caregivers who are at least 65 years of age at Duke University Hospital. Caregivers must be the primary person who will aid patients at home after hospital discharge. The caregiver will receive a short message service (SMS) link and/or e-mail to download the digital health application on their own smartphone or tablet. The study team will guide the caregiver through features of the application including how to complete demographics questionnaire and surveys for caregiving preparedness, and how to reply to reminders. For data collection, the investigators will use CLARE analytics for feasibility analysis, interview data to determine modifiable factors that will enhance CLARE use, and pre-post preparedness in caregiving data to explore preliminary efficacy of CLARE.
The study has 7 research questions regarding the use of the air quality sensor in residential care home for the elderly: Primary study questions: 1. Can the real-time monitoring of air quality and the subsequent activities to improve air quality and long-term measures reduce respiratory symptoms? Secondary study questions: 2. Can the real-time monitoring of air quality and the subsequent activities to improve air quality and long-term measures reduce pulse rate, systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure? 3. What are the activities to improve air quality and long-term measures that aim to improve air quality, including the rationales for change and non-change of the measures? 4. What are the changes in air quality indexes recorded by the air quality sensor? Auxiliary study questions: 5. How many days do the residents feel sick and stay in hospitals? 6. What are the perceived benefits and feasibility of the air quality sensor?
The study has 10 research questions regarding the cognitive training program and tablet-based interactive games: Primary study questions: 1. Can the participation of 12-week cognitive training program using tablet-based interactive games maintain cognitive functioning? Secondary study questions: 2. Can the participation of 12-week cognitive training program using tablet-based interactive games improve the scores of 6 supplier-developed cognitive domains (including executive function, memory, eye-hand coordination, attention, visual-spatial ability, language)? 3. Can the participation of 12-week cognitive training program using tablet-based interactive games improve the reaction time of the participants? 4. What is the attendance rate in the cognitive training program, and for how long do the participants play the tablet-based interactive games? 5. What is the usability and acceptability of the tablet-based interactive games? Auxiliary study questions: 6. Can the participation of 12-week cognitive training program using tablet-based interactive games reduce neuropsychiatric symptoms? 7. Can the participation of 12-week cognitive training program using tablet-based interactive games improve upper-body flexibility? 8. What are the physical side effects of using digital devices in the 12-week cognitive training program? 9. What are the perceived benefits and feasibility of the cognitive training program and tablet-based interactive games? 10. Can the participation of 12-week cognitive training program using tablet-based interactive games improve activities of daily living of persons with intellectual disability?
The study has 6 research questions regarding the use of dysphagia cups: Primary study questions: 1. Can the use of the dysphagia cups increase water consumption and liquid consumption during the trial period? 2. Can the use of the dysphagia cups reduce the frequency and intensity of choking and coughing while drinking? 3. What are the potential risks to the service users while using the dysphagia cups? Secondary study question: 4. Can the use of the dysphagia cups enhance the autonomy of the service users in drinking? Auxiliary study questions: 5. Can the use of the dysphagia cups reduce the amount of thickener used for water consumption? 6. What are the perceived benefits and acceptability of using the dysphagia cups?
The study has 12 research questions regarding the use of resident-handling device in elderly residential setting: Primary study questions: 1. Can the new resident-handling devices improve resident comfortability during the resident-handling task? 2. Are the new resident-handling devices perceived as safe compared to the conventional resident-handling devices? 3. What are the potential risks to the residents and care staff involve in the resident-handling tasks using the new and conventional resident-handling devices? Secondary study questions: 4. What are care staff attitudes towards the new and conventional resident-handling devices? 5. What are the perceived difficulties in using the new and conventional resident-handling devices? Auxiliary study questions: 6. What are the operation difficulties in the use of the new resident-handling devices in actual operation? 7. What are the perceived benefits and feasibility of using the new resident-handling devices compared to conventional resident-handling devices? 8. [For resident-handling device for residents with low dependency only] Can the new resident-handling device improve resident comfortability in functional activities? 9. [For resident-handling device for residents with low dependency only] Is the new resident-handling device perceived as safe for functional activities compared to the conventional resident-handling devices? 10. [For resident-handling device for residents with low dependency only] What are the potential risks to the residents and care staff involve in functional activities using the new and conventional resident-handling devices? 11. [For resident-handling device for residents with high dependency only] What is the average force exertion of care staff? 12. [For resident-handling device for residents with high dependency only] How frequently does care staff exert excessive force (i.e. Ergo feedback)?
The study has 6 research questions regarding the use of the anti-wandering system in day activity centre cum hostel for persons with intellectual disabilities: Primary study questions: 1. Can the anti-wandering system reduce the time in seconds to turn off the alarm made by the system (a proxy measure of the response time of care staff)? 2. Can the anti-wandering system reduce the burden of care staff on keeping track of the residents? Secondary study questions: 3. How many alarms does the anti-wandering system generate? 4. How many false alarms does the anti-wandering system made as reported by staff? Auxiliary study questions: 5. What are the reasons for keeping or loosening restrictions on users due to the use of the anti-wandering system? 6. What are the perceived benefits and feasibility of anti-wandering system compared to conventional anti-wandering practices?
The study has 2 primary research questions, 4 secondary research questions, and 2 auxiliary research questions targeting elderly with hearing impairment. The research questions are: Primary study questions: 1. Can the use of the smart hearing aids reduce loneliness at the end of intervention? 2. Can the use of the smart hearing aids improve quality of life at the end of intervention? Secondary study questions: 3. Can the use of the smart hearing aids improve the communication quality between caregivers and participants at the end of intervention? 4. How is the satisfaction of the participants with the smart hearing aids? 5. What are the factors leading to the use and non-use of the smart hearing aids? 6. What is the usage time of the smart hearing aids? Auxiliary study questions: 7. How is the caregiver burden when facilitating the participants to use the smart hearing aids? 8. What are the perceived benefits and acceptability of the smart hearing aids?