Comparison of Nursing Personnel’s User Experiences of Four Types of Assistive Robots

Challenges Include Knowledge and Safety Issues

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference article in proceedingsScientificpeer-review

Abstract

The interest to employ service robots in the care context is increasing due to the aging population. Many studies have examined robot acceptance from various angles, but reports of actual robot usage and the user experiences of professional personnel are scarce. Via an online user experience questionnaire, this study targeted nursing personnel who have used assistive robots in their work. Ten statements, modified after the Almere questionnaire, concerned the respondents’ acceptance of robots which they had used. Four different types of robots (robotic therapy animal; rehabilitation/recreational robot; telepresence robot; and patient lifting robot) were each covered separately. Most of the reported robot usage was with the seal robot Paro, and regular use of any robot was rare. The intentions to use and the attitudes towards each type of robot were generally positive. The patient lifting robots were most positively received regarding their usefulness, whereas the interaction with the robotic therapy animals was rated pleasant. Fewer respondents had used the rehabilitation/recreational robots and telepresence robots, which received lower scores than the others regarding many of the studied user experience aspects. In general, more knowledge is needed to make good use of the robots. Furthermore, it seems there are some concerns of the safety of using them. These results show that the initial steps towards employing robots in care work have been taken. There is a lot of under explored ground between the simple-to-use therapy animal robots and functional patient lifting robots, and the potential and acceptance of those robots is yet to be seen. These results give a baseline for monitoring the service robot acceptance of nursing personnel based on actual robot usage.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationACHI 2019
Subtitle of host publicationThe Twelfth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions
EditorsUttam Kokil, Tomoko Ota
PublisherInternational Academy, Research, and Industry Association IARIA
Pages147-153
ISBN (Print)978-1-61208-686-6
Publication statusPublished - 2019
MoE publication typeA4 Article in a conference publication
Event12th International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, ACHI 2019 - Athens, Greece
Duration: 24 Feb 201928 Feb 2019

Conference

Conference12th International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, ACHI 2019
Abbreviated titleACHI
CountryGreece
CityAthens
Period24/02/1928/02/19

Fingerprint

Nursing
Robots
Animals
Personnel
Patient rehabilitation
Robotics

Keywords

  • Human-robot interaction
  • service robots
  • acceptance
  • user experience
  • nursing

Cite this

Aaltonen, I., Turja, T., & Niemelä, M. (2019). Comparison of Nursing Personnel’s User Experiences of Four Types of Assistive Robots: Challenges Include Knowledge and Safety Issues. In U. Kokil, & T. Ota (Eds.), ACHI 2019: The Twelfth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions (pp. 147-153). International Academy, Research, and Industry Association IARIA.
Aaltonen, Iina ; Turja, Tuuli ; Niemelä, Marketta. / Comparison of Nursing Personnel’s User Experiences of Four Types of Assistive Robots : Challenges Include Knowledge and Safety Issues. ACHI 2019: The Twelfth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions. editor / Uttam Kokil ; Tomoko Ota. International Academy, Research, and Industry Association IARIA, 2019. pp. 147-153
@inproceedings{d0a6f1292d0f4b0da98f50d51996708a,
title = "Comparison of Nursing Personnel’s User Experiences of Four Types of Assistive Robots: Challenges Include Knowledge and Safety Issues",
abstract = "The interest to employ service robots in the care context is increasing due to the aging population. Many studies have examined robot acceptance from various angles, but reports of actual robot usage and the user experiences of professional personnel are scarce. Via an online user experience questionnaire, this study targeted nursing personnel who have used assistive robots in their work. Ten statements, modified after the Almere questionnaire, concerned the respondents’ acceptance of robots which they had used. Four different types of robots (robotic therapy animal; rehabilitation/recreational robot; telepresence robot; and patient lifting robot) were each covered separately. Most of the reported robot usage was with the seal robot Paro, and regular use of any robot was rare. The intentions to use and the attitudes towards each type of robot were generally positive. The patient lifting robots were most positively received regarding their usefulness, whereas the interaction with the robotic therapy animals was rated pleasant. Fewer respondents had used the rehabilitation/recreational robots and telepresence robots, which received lower scores than the others regarding many of the studied user experience aspects. In general, more knowledge is needed to make good use of the robots. Furthermore, it seems there are some concerns of the safety of using them. These results show that the initial steps towards employing robots in care work have been taken. There is a lot of under explored ground between the simple-to-use therapy animal robots and functional patient lifting robots, and the potential and acceptance of those robots is yet to be seen. These results give a baseline for monitoring the service robot acceptance of nursing personnel based on actual robot usage.",
keywords = "Human-robot interaction, service robots, acceptance, user experience, nursing",
author = "Iina Aaltonen and Tuuli Turja and Marketta Niemel{\"a}",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-1-61208-686-6",
pages = "147--153",
editor = "Uttam Kokil and Tomoko Ota",
booktitle = "ACHI 2019",
publisher = "International Academy, Research, and Industry Association IARIA",
address = "United States",

}

Aaltonen, I, Turja, T & Niemelä, M 2019, Comparison of Nursing Personnel’s User Experiences of Four Types of Assistive Robots: Challenges Include Knowledge and Safety Issues. in U Kokil & T Ota (eds), ACHI 2019: The Twelfth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions. International Academy, Research, and Industry Association IARIA, pp. 147-153, 12th International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, ACHI 2019, Athens, Greece, 24/02/19.

Comparison of Nursing Personnel’s User Experiences of Four Types of Assistive Robots : Challenges Include Knowledge and Safety Issues. / Aaltonen, Iina; Turja, Tuuli; Niemelä, Marketta.

ACHI 2019: The Twelfth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions. ed. / Uttam Kokil; Tomoko Ota. International Academy, Research, and Industry Association IARIA, 2019. p. 147-153.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference article in proceedingsScientificpeer-review

TY - GEN

T1 - Comparison of Nursing Personnel’s User Experiences of Four Types of Assistive Robots

T2 - Challenges Include Knowledge and Safety Issues

AU - Aaltonen, Iina

AU - Turja, Tuuli

AU - Niemelä, Marketta

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - The interest to employ service robots in the care context is increasing due to the aging population. Many studies have examined robot acceptance from various angles, but reports of actual robot usage and the user experiences of professional personnel are scarce. Via an online user experience questionnaire, this study targeted nursing personnel who have used assistive robots in their work. Ten statements, modified after the Almere questionnaire, concerned the respondents’ acceptance of robots which they had used. Four different types of robots (robotic therapy animal; rehabilitation/recreational robot; telepresence robot; and patient lifting robot) were each covered separately. Most of the reported robot usage was with the seal robot Paro, and regular use of any robot was rare. The intentions to use and the attitudes towards each type of robot were generally positive. The patient lifting robots were most positively received regarding their usefulness, whereas the interaction with the robotic therapy animals was rated pleasant. Fewer respondents had used the rehabilitation/recreational robots and telepresence robots, which received lower scores than the others regarding many of the studied user experience aspects. In general, more knowledge is needed to make good use of the robots. Furthermore, it seems there are some concerns of the safety of using them. These results show that the initial steps towards employing robots in care work have been taken. There is a lot of under explored ground between the simple-to-use therapy animal robots and functional patient lifting robots, and the potential and acceptance of those robots is yet to be seen. These results give a baseline for monitoring the service robot acceptance of nursing personnel based on actual robot usage.

AB - The interest to employ service robots in the care context is increasing due to the aging population. Many studies have examined robot acceptance from various angles, but reports of actual robot usage and the user experiences of professional personnel are scarce. Via an online user experience questionnaire, this study targeted nursing personnel who have used assistive robots in their work. Ten statements, modified after the Almere questionnaire, concerned the respondents’ acceptance of robots which they had used. Four different types of robots (robotic therapy animal; rehabilitation/recreational robot; telepresence robot; and patient lifting robot) were each covered separately. Most of the reported robot usage was with the seal robot Paro, and regular use of any robot was rare. The intentions to use and the attitudes towards each type of robot were generally positive. The patient lifting robots were most positively received regarding their usefulness, whereas the interaction with the robotic therapy animals was rated pleasant. Fewer respondents had used the rehabilitation/recreational robots and telepresence robots, which received lower scores than the others regarding many of the studied user experience aspects. In general, more knowledge is needed to make good use of the robots. Furthermore, it seems there are some concerns of the safety of using them. These results show that the initial steps towards employing robots in care work have been taken. There is a lot of under explored ground between the simple-to-use therapy animal robots and functional patient lifting robots, and the potential and acceptance of those robots is yet to be seen. These results give a baseline for monitoring the service robot acceptance of nursing personnel based on actual robot usage.

KW - Human-robot interaction

KW - service robots

KW - acceptance

KW - user experience

KW - nursing

M3 - Conference article in proceedings

SN - 978-1-61208-686-6

SP - 147

EP - 153

BT - ACHI 2019

A2 - Kokil, Uttam

A2 - Ota, Tomoko

PB - International Academy, Research, and Industry Association IARIA

ER -

Aaltonen I, Turja T, Niemelä M. Comparison of Nursing Personnel’s User Experiences of Four Types of Assistive Robots: Challenges Include Knowledge and Safety Issues. In Kokil U, Ota T, editors, ACHI 2019: The Twelfth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions. International Academy, Research, and Industry Association IARIA. 2019. p. 147-153