Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T01:16:48.181Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What do cognitively intact older people think about the use of electronic tracking devices for people with dementia? A preliminary analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2010

Ruth Landau ,
Shirli Werner ,
Gail K. Auslander ,
Noam Shoval  and
Jeremia Heinik
Ruth Landau*
Affiliation:
Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Shirli Werner
Affiliation:
Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Gail K. Auslander
Affiliation:
Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Noam Shoval
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Jeremia Heinik
Affiliation:
Sackler School of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Ruth Landau, PhD, Associate Professor, Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem 91905, Israel, Phone: +972-3-6426793; Fax: +972-3-6415918. Email: mslanda@mscc.huji.ac.il.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background: The issue of using advanced tracking technologies such as Global Positioning Systems (GPS) is part of a wider debate on the acceptability of assistive technology to older people with dementia. The use of GPS can enhance the personal safety of older people by alerting caregivers to potential dangers or adverse events that might threaten the individual's health and safety, but at the same time it raises ethical concerns. This study examines the attitudes of cognitively intact older people toward the use of tracking devices for people with dementia.

Methods: The analysis is based on quantitative data from a convenience sample (n = 42) and qualitative data gathered from two focus groups of cognitively intact older people in Israel.

Results: Whereas cognitively intact older people clearly differentiate between themselves and people with dementia, they support the use of tracking devices when dementia is either formally diagnosed or its signs are evident. They value the safety of people with dementia above preserving their autonomy. Although they perceive the decision to use tracking devices as an intra-family issue, they expect guidance from professional caregivers of people with dementia. The acceptability of tracking devices is dependent on their appropriate weight, size and ease of use.

Conclusions: Cognitively intact older people favor the idea of tracking people with dementia. To facilitate family decision-making on the use of tracking devices, structured meetings guided by professionals and including persons with dementia and their family caregivers are suggested.

Keywords

Alzheimer's diseasedementiaGlobal Positioning Systems (GPS)cognitively intact elderlyIsrael
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 22 , Special Issue 8: Focus on prevention in psychogeriatrics , December 2010 , pp. 1301 - 1309
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brudney, D. (2009). Choosing for another. Hastings Center Report, 39, 31–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Counsel and Care (2001). Residents Taking Risks: Minimizing the Use of Restraint. London: Counsel and Care.Google Scholar
Delazer, M. et al. (2009). Decision making under risk and under ambiguity in Parkinson's disease. Neuropsychologia, 47, 1901–1908.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elliott, B. A., Gessert, C. E. and Peden-McAlpine, C. (2008). Family decision making in advanced dementia: narrative and ethics. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 23, 251–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Essen, A. (2008). The two facets of electronic care surveillance: an exploration of the views of older people who live with monitoring devices. Social Science and Medicine, 67, 128–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisk, J. D., Beattie, B. L., Donelly, M., Byszewsky, A. and Molnar, F. J. (2007). Disclosure of the diagnosis of dementia. Alzheimer's and Dementia, 3, 404–410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Georges, J., Jansen, S., Jackson, J., Meyrieux, A., Sadowska, A. and Selmes, M. (2008). Alzheimer's disease in real life: the dementia carer's survey. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 23, 546–551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herman, D. G., Htay, U. Hla and McShane, R. (2007). Non-pharmacological interventions for wandering of people with dementia in the domestic setting. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 1, CD005994.Google Scholar
Keating, D. T., Nayeem, K., Gilmartin, J. J. and O'Keeffe, S. T. (2005). Advance directives for truth disclosure. Chest 128, 1037–1039.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, K., Reinhart, S. and Brooks-Danso, A. (2008). Executive summary: professional partners supporting family caregivers. Journal of Social Work Education 44, 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, R., Werner, S., Auslander, G., Shoval, N. and Heinik, J. (2009). Attitudes of family and professional caregivers towards the use of electronic tracking devices for people with dementia: An exploratory study. British Journal of Social Work, 39, 670–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, R., Auslander, G., Werner, S., Shoval, N. and Heinik, J. (2010). Family and professional caregivers’ views of using advanced technology to track people with dementia. Qualitative Health Research, 20, 409–419.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landau, R., Auslander, G. K., Werner, S., Shoval, N. and Heinik, J. (in press). Who should make the decision on the use of GPS for people with dementia? Aging and Mental Health.Google Scholar
Lautrette, A., Ciroldi, M., Ksibi, H. and Azoulay, E. (2006). End-of-life family conferences: rooted in the evidence. Critical Care Medicine, 34, S364–S372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCreadie, C. and Tinker, A. (2005). The acceptability of assistive technology to older people. Ageing and Society, 25, 91–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McShane, R., Gedling, K., Kenwad, B., Kenward, R., Hope, T. and Jacoby, R. (1998). The feasibility of electronic tracking devised in dementia. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 13, 556–563.3.0.CO;2-6>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miskelly, F. (2004). A novel system of electronic tagging in patients with dementia and wandering. Age and Ageing, 33, 304–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moorman, S. M., Hauser, R. M. and Carr, D. (2009). Do older adults know their spouses’ end of life treatment preferences? Research on Aging, 31, 463–491.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papastavrou, E. Kalokerinou, A. Papacostas, S. Tsangari, H. and Sourtzi, P. (2007). Caring for a relative with dementia: family caregiver burden. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58, 446–457.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rialle, V., Ollivet, C., Guigui, C. and Herve, C. (2008). What do family caregivers of Alzheimer's disease patients desire in smart home technologies? Methods of Information in Medicine, 47, 63–69.Google ScholarPubMed
Ritchie, J. and Spencer, L. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In Bryman, A. and Burgess, R. G. (eds.), Analyzing Qualitative Data (pp. 173–194). London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, L. et al. (2006). Wandering in dementia: a systematic literature review of the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions to prevent wandering in dementia and evaluation of the ethical implications and acceptability of their use. Health Technology Assessment, 10, 1–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, L. et al. (2007a). Balancing rights and risks: conflicting perspectives in the management of wandering in dementia. Health, Risk and Society, 9, 389–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, L. et al. (2007b). Effectiveness and acceptability of non-pharmacological interventions to reduce wandering in dementia: a systematic review. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 22, 9–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, L. Brittain, K. Lindsay, S. Jackson, D. and Olivier, P. (2009). Keeping In Touch Everyday (KITE) project: developing assistive technologies with people with dementia and their carers to promote independence. International Psychogeriatrics, 21, 494–502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross-Sheriff, F. and Swigonski, M. (2009). Caregiving for the elderly: Personal and professional response. Journal of Women and Social Work, 24, 221–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, T. (2009). End-of-life care for people with dementia: a thematic review of familial involvement, practices and beliefs. International Journal on Disability and Human Development, 8 (special issue), 15–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scarmeas, N. et al. (2007). Disruptive behavior as a predictor in Alzheimer disease. Archives of Neurology, 64, 1755–1761.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shoval, N. et al. (2008). The use of advanced tracking technologies for the analysis of mobility in Alzheimer's disease and related cognitive diseases. BMC Geriatrics 8, 7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wey, S. (2007). The Ethical Use of Assistive Technology. Available at http://www.atdementia.org.uk/editorial.asp?page_id=47&keywords=Wey. Last accessed 31 May 2010.Google Scholar