Search

Background and Objectives Involving older persons in the design process of digital technology (DT) promotes the development of technologies that are appealing, beneficial, and used. However, negative discourse on aging and ageism are potential underlying factors that could influence which and how DTs are designed and how older persons are involved in the design process. This scoping review investigates the explicit and implicit manifestations of ageism in the design process of DT. Research Design and Methods Seven databases were screened for studies reporting on the design of DT with older persons between January 2015 and January 2020. Data regarding study and DT characteristics, discourse about older persons, and their involvement in the design process were extracted, coded, and analyzed using critical discourse analysis. Results Sixty articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Various forms of exclusion of older persons from the design process were identified, such as no or low involvement, upper-age limits, and sample biases toward relatively “active,” healthy and “tech-savvy” older persons. Critical discourse analysis revealed the use of outdated language, stereotypical categorizations, and/or design decisions based on ageism in 71.7% of the studies. Discussion and Implications A discrepancy was found between an “ideal” discourse regarding the involvement of older persons throughout the design process and actual practice. Manifestations of ageism, errors, and biases of designing DT with older persons are discussed. This article calls for more authentic inclusion of older persons and higher awareness toward the implications of ageism in the design process of DT.

Although technology has the potential to promote aging in place, the use of technology remains scarce among community-living older adults with dementia. A reason might be that many stakeholders are involved who all have a different perspective on technology use (i.e., needs, wishes, attitudes, possibilities, and difficulties). We systematically searched the literature in order to provide an overview of perspectives of different stakeholders on technology use among community-living older adults with dementia. After selection, 46 studies were included. We mainly found perspectives of informal caregivers and, to a lesser extent, of persons with dementia and formal caregivers. Perspectives of suppliers of technology were not present. Shared perspectives among persons with dementia and informal and formal caregivers were, among other things, ease of use, stability and flexibility of technology, importance of privacy, and confidentiality. We also found that among older persons, fun and pleasure, in addition to enhancing freedom and independence, facilitates technology use. Informal caregivers' peace of mind and relief of burden also appeared to be important in using technologies. Formal caregivers value the potential of technologies to improve monitoring and communication. Insight in shared, and conflicting perspectives of stakeholders are essential to enhance the use of technology

Background and objectives: For people with dementia living in residential care facilities, maintaining autonomy and receiving informal care are important. The objective of this review is to understand how caregiving approaches and physical environment, including technologies contribute to the maintenance of autonomy and informal care provision for this population. Research design and method: A literature review of peer-reviewed articles published between January 1995 and July 2017 was performed. Realist logic of analysis was used, involving context, mechanism and outcome configurations. Results: Forty-nine articles were included. The improvement of the relationship between residents and formal/informal caregivers is important. This increases the knowledge (sharing) about the resident and contributes to their autonomy. A social, flexible, and welcoming attitude of the formal caregiver improves the provision of informal care. Specially designed spaces, for instance, therapeutic gardens, create activities for residents that remind them of themselves and contribute to their autonomy. Use of technologies reduces caregiver's time for primary tasks and therefore enables secondary tasks such as interaction with the residents. Discussion and implications: The results revealed how residential care facilities could maintain autonomy of their residents and improve informal care delivery using caregiving approaches and the physical environment including technologies. The results are supporting toward each other in maintaining autonomy and also helped in enhancing informal care provision. For residential care facilities that want to maintain the autonomy of their residents and improve informal care delivery, it is important to pay attention to all aspects of living in a residential care facility.

Background: As for all individuals, the Internet is important in the everyday life of older adults. Research on older adults’ use of the Internet has merely focused on users versus nonusers and consequences of Internet use and nonuse. Older adults are a heterogeneous group, which may implicate that their use of the Internet is diverse as well. Older adults can use the Internet for different activities, and this usage can be of influence on benefits the Internet can have for them. Objective: The aim of this paper was to describe the diversity or heterogeneity in the activities for which older adults use the Internet and determine whether diversity is related to social or health-related variables. Methods: We used data of a national representative Internet panel in the Netherlands. Panel members aged 65 years and older and who have access to and use the Internet were selected (N=1418). We conducted a latent class analysis based on the Internet activities that panel members reported to spend time on. Second, we described the identified clusters with descriptive statistics and compared the clusters using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-square tests. Results: Four clusters were distinguished. Cluster 1 was labeled as the “practical users” (36.88%, n=523). These respondents mainly used the Internet for practical and financial purposes such as searching for information, comparing products, and banking. Respondents in Cluster 2, the “minimizers” (32.23%, n=457), reported lowest frequency on most Internet activities, are older (mean age 73 years), and spent the smallest time on the Internet. Cluster 3 was labeled as the “maximizers” (17.77%, n=252); these respondents used the Internet for various activities, spent most time on the Internet, and were relatively younger (mean age below 70 years). Respondents in Cluster 4, the “social users,” mainly used the Internet for social and leisure-related activities such as gaming and social network