背景:智能浴室技术为自动测量一系列生物标志物和其他数据提供了无与伦比的机会。不幸的是,在这一领域的努力主要是由技术推动而不是市场拉动方法驱动的,这降低了成功采用的机会。到目前为止,对用例知之甚少,障碍,以及智能浴室潜在用户感知的愿望。
目的:本研究旨在调查来自普通人群的参与者如何使用安装在家中的装有智能传感器的马桶座圈。这项研究有助于回答以下问题:公民看到这种创新的用例是什么?他们看到的日常使用的限制和障碍是什么,包括对隐私的担忧,缺乏与日常实践的契合,和对用户体验的未满足的期望?
方法:总的来说,来自30个家庭的31名参与者参加了一项由3个(部分重叠)阶段组成的研究:参与者填写问卷,引发他们对智能浴室使用和个人健康的想法;provotyping,参与者以智能马桶座圈的形式受到温和的挑衅,他们用了两周;和讨论,参与者参加了基于网络的焦点小组会议,讨论他们的经验。
结果:参与者主要发现厕所的日常使用,包括必要时的安装和拆卸,相对容易,没有并发症。发生并发症的地方,与会者提到了与原型设计有关的问题,技术,或与使用厕所和卫生的正常做法不匹配。提到了广泛的用例,从发出潜在有害健康状况或现有状况恶化的信号到记录物理数据到测量生物标志物以告知诊断和行为改变。参与者在是否让别人使用方面差异很大,甚至知道,座位。对于大多数参与者来说,拥有和控制自己的数据至关重要。
结论:这项研究表明,参与者认为智能马桶盖是可以接受和有效的,只要它适合有关厕所使用和卫生的日常做法。智能马桶座的潜在用途范围很广,只要保证隐私和对披露和数据的控制权。
BACKGROUND: Smart bathroom technology offers unrivaled opportunities for the
automated measurement of a range of biomarkers and other data. Unfortunately, efforts in this area are mostly driven by a technology push rather than market pull approach, which decreases the chances of successful adoption. As yet, little is known about the use cases, barriers, and desires that potential users of smart bathrooms perceive.
OBJECTIVE: This
study aimed to investigate how participants from the general population experience using a smart sensor-equipped toilet seat installed in their home. The
study contributes to answering the following questions: What use cases do citizens see for this innovation? and What are the limitations and barriers to its everyday use that they see, including concerns regarding privacy, the lack of fit with everyday practices, and unmet expectations for user experience?
METHODS: Overall, 31 participants from 30 households participated in a
study consisting of 3 (partially overlapping) stages: sensitizing, in which participants filled out questionnaires to trigger their thoughts about smart bathroom use and personal health; provotyping, in which participants received a gentle provocation in the form of a smart toilet seat, which they used for 2 weeks; and discussion, in which participants took part in a web-based focus group session to discuss their experiences.
RESULTS: Participants mostly found the everyday use of the toilet, including installation and dismantling when necessary, to be relatively easy and free of complications. Where complications occurred, participants mentioned issues related to the design of the prototype, technology, or mismatches with normal practices in using toilets and hygiene. A broad range of use cases were mentioned, ranging from signaling potentially detrimental health conditions or exacerbations of existing conditions to documenting physical data to measuring biomarkers to inform a diagnosis and behavioral change. Participants differed greatly in whether they let others use, or even know about, the seat. Ownership and control over their own data were essential for most participants.
CONCLUSIONS: This
study showed that participants felt that a smart toilet seat could be acceptable and effective, as long as it fits everyday practices concerning toilet use and hygiene. The range of potential uses for a smart toilet seat is broad, as long as privacy and control over disclosure and data are warranted.