{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Ethics, design, and implementation criteria of digital assistive technologies for people with dementia from a multiple stakeholder perspective: a qualitative study.
{Author}: Köhler S;Perry J;Biernetzky OA;Kirste T;Teipel SJ;
{Journal}: BMC Med Ethics
{Volume}: 25
{Issue}: 1
{Year}: 2024 Jul 27
{Factor}: 2.834
{DOI}: 10.1186/s12910-024-01080-6
{Abstract}: BACKGROUND: Dementia impairs the ability of people with dementia to be autonomous and independent. They need support from third parties, who should ideally respect their autonomy and independence as much as possible. Supporting people with dementia can be very burdensome for caregivers and numbers of patients increase while numbers of potential caregivers decline. Digital assistive technologies (DATs) that directly support patients or their caregivers may help bridging the increasing gap between need of support and available resources. DATs have the potential to preserve the autonomy and independence of people with dementia and promote their abilities, if they are properly designed in close interaction with future users. In our study, we focused on ethical concerns, technological requirements, and implementation criteria for DAT in general and specifically to support outdoor mobility of people with dementia.
METHODS: We applied a qualitative approach and conducted a World Café (2 tables, n = 7) and an online focus group (n = 6) with people with dementia, relatives, healthcare professionals, scientists, ethics experts, and experts for digitally-assisted medical care. We descriptively analyzed the data using a content analysis approach.
RESULTS: The participants reported technological (e.g., lack of Wi-Fi), financial (e.g., expensive devices or lack of budget for DATs), political (e.g., legal hurdles such as the European Medical Device Law or data protection regulations) as well as user-related hurdles (e.g., lack of digital competence) for the implementation of DAT in dementia care. Among the issues discussed were the importance of autonomy, independence, safety, privacy, and questions of decision making capacity in DAT's use. Participants identified opportunities and benefits in self-learning, situation-aware DATs and wished for dementia-friendly communities. They emphasized the value of personal interaction that should not be replaced, but rather supported by DAT.
CONCLUSIONS: The results revealed multiple hurdles and ethical concerns for DAT use and provided recommendations for designing and implementing DATs. Further investigations are needed on the impact of DAT on personal interactions in caregiving and the role of DAT in dementia-friendly communities.