BACKGROUND: Despite the ever-increasing offering of SMART technologies (ie, computer-controlled devices acting intelligently and capable of monitoring, analyzing or reporting), a wide gap exists between the development of new technological innovations and their adoption in everyday care for older adults. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the barriers and concerns related to the adoption of SMART technologies among different groups of stakeholders. METHODS: Data from 4 sources were used: semistructured in-person or internet-based interviews with professional caregivers (n=12), structured email interviews with experts in the area of aging (n=9), a web-based survey of older adults (>55 years) attending the Virtual University of the Third Age (n=369), and a case study on the adoption of new technology by an older adult care facility. RESULTS: Although all stakeholders noted the potential of SMART technologies to improve older adult care, multiple barriers to their adoption were identified. Caregivers perceived older adults as disinterested or incompetent in using technology, reported preferring known strategies over new technologies, and noted own fears of using technology. Experts viewed technologies as essential but expressed concerns about cost, low digital competency of older adults, and lack of support or willingness to implement technologies in older adult care. Older adults reported few concerns overall, but among the mentioned concerns were lack of ability or interest, misuse of data, and limited usefulness (in specific subgroups or situations). In addition, older adults' ratings of the usefulness of different technologies correlated with their self-rating of digital competency (r=0.258; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults appeared to have more positive views of various technologies than professional caregivers; however, their concerns varied by the type of technology. Lack of competence and lack of support were among the common themes, suggesting that educationally oriented programs for both older adults and their caregivers should be pursued.

Anume Ltd Hradec Kralové Czech Republic

Department of Human Movement Studies University of Ostrava Ostrava Czech Republic

Faculty of Science University of Hradec Karlove Hradec Kralove Czech Republic

SeneCura SeniorCentrum HŠH Inc Prague Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Proměny věkového složení obyvatelstva ČR - 2001-2050. Český Statistický Úřad. [2022-01-14]. https://www.czso.cz/csu/czso/promeny-vekoveho-slozeni-obyvatelstva-cr-2001-2050 .

Mair CA, Quiñones AR, Pasha MA. Care preferences among middle-aged and older adults with chronic disease in Europe: individual health care needs and national health care infrastructure. Gerontologist. 2016 Aug;56(4):687–701. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnu119. gnu119 PubMed DOI PMC

Andel R. Aging in the Czech Republic. Gerontologist. 2014 Dec;54(6):893–900. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnu047.gnu047 PubMed DOI

Vaculíková J, Vávrová S. Exploring the meaning of old age from the Czech adult perspective: a quantitative research study. Kontakt. 2019 Sep;21(3):326–33. doi: 10.32725/kont.2019.038. DOI

Vrabková I, Ertingerová I, Kukuliač P. Determination of gaps in the spatial accessibility of nursing services for persons over the age of 65 with lowered self-sufficiency: evidence from the Czech Republic. PLoS One. 2021 Jan 11;16(1):e0244991. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244991. PONE-D-20-31947 PubMed DOI PMC

Kubalčíková K, Havlíková J. Current developments in social care services for older adults in the Czech Republic: trends towards deinstitutionalization and marketization. J Soc Serv Res. 2016 Mar 07;42(2):180–98. doi: 10.1080/01488376.2015.1129014. DOI

Oxford Learner's Dictionaries homepage. Oxford Learner's Dictionaries. [2022-04-08]. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/

International classification of health interventions (ICHI) World Health Organization. [2021-01-18]. https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/international-classification-of-health-interventions .

Chen LK. Gerontechnology and artificial intelligence: better care for older people. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2020 Sep 10;91:104252. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2020.104252. S0167-4943(20)30249-1 PubMed DOI PMC

Pedrozo Campos Antunes T, Souza Bulle de Oliveira A, Hudec R, Brusque Crocetta T, Ferreira de Lima Antão JY, de Almeida Barbosa RT, Guarnieri R, Massetti T, Garner DM, de Abreu LC. Assistive technology for communication of older adults: a systematic review. Aging Ment Health. 2019 Apr;23(4):417–27. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2018.1426718. PubMed DOI

Choi YK, Lazar A, Demiris G, Thompson HJ. Emerging smart home technologies to facilitate engaging with aging. J Gerontol Nurs. 2019 Dec 01;45(12):41–8. doi: 10.3928/00989134-20191105-06. PubMed DOI

Clipper B. The influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on technology: adoption in health care. Nurse Lead. 2020 Oct;18(5):500–3. doi: 10.1016/j.mnl.2020.06.008. S1541-4612(20)30171-3 PubMed DOI PMC

Bert F, Giacometti M, Gualano MR, Siliquini R. Smartphones and health promotion: a review of the evidence. J Med Syst. 2014 Jan;38(1):9995. doi: 10.1007/s10916-013-9995-7. PubMed DOI

Hale TM, Goldner M, Stern M, Drentea P, Cotton SR. Patterns of online health searching 2002-2010: implications for social capital, health disparities and the de-professionalization of medical knowledge. Res Sociol Health Care. 2014;32:35–60. doi: 10.1108/S0275-495920140000032016. DOI

Liang TH. Matrix analysis of the digital divide in eHealth services using awareness, want, and adoption gap. J Med Internet Res. 2012 Feb 13;14(1):e11. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1670. v14i1e11 PubMed DOI PMC

Kruse CS, Mileski M, Moreno J. Mobile health solutions for the aging population: a systematic narrative analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2017 May;23(4):439–51. doi: 10.1177/1357633X16649790. 1357633X16649790 PubMed DOI

Kampmeijer R, Pavlova M, Tambor M, Golinowska S, Groot W. The use of e-health and m-health tools in health promotion and primary prevention among older adults: a systematic literature review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Sep 05;16 Suppl 5(Suppl 5):290. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1522-3. 10.1186/s12913-016-1522-3 PubMed DOI PMC

Marangunić N, Granić A. Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2014 Feb 16;14:81–95. doi: 10.1007/s10209-014-0348-1. DOI

Khechine H, Lakhal S, Ndjambou P. A meta‐analysis of the UTAUT model: eleven years later. Can J Adm Sci. 2016 Jun 06;33(2):138–52. doi: 10.1002/cjas.1381. DOI

Olsen WK, Haralambos M, Holborn M. Developments in Sociology. Harlow, UK: Causeway Press Ltd; 2004. Triangulation in social research: : qualitative and quantitative methods can really be mixed.

Blaikie NW. A critique of the use of triangulation in social research. Qual Quant. 1991 May;25:115–36. doi: 10.1007/bf00145701. DOI

Terp R, Kayser L, Lindhardt T. Older patients' competence, preferences, and attitudes toward digital technology use: explorative study. JMIR Hum Factors. 2021 May 14;8(2):e27005. doi: 10.2196/27005. v8i2e27005 PubMed DOI PMC

Lim HT, Han JW. A user-centered classification framework for digital service innovation: case for elderly care service. Int J Content. 2018 Mar;14(1):7–11. doi: 10.5392/IJoC.2018.14.1.007. DOI

Magsamen-Conrad K, Upadhyaya S, Joa CY, Dowd J. Bridging the divide: using UTAUT to predict multigenerational tablet adoption practices. Comput Human Behav. 2015 Sep 01;50:186–96. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.032. PubMed DOI PMC

Vroman KG, Arthanat S, Lysack C. “Who over 65 is online?” Older adults’ dispositions toward information communication technology. Comput Hum Behav. 2015 Feb;43:156–66. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.018. DOI

Wagner N, Hassanein K, Head M. Computer use by older adults: a multi-disciplinary review. Comput Hum Behav. 2010 Sep;26(5):870–82. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.029. DOI

Olson KE, O'Brien MA, Rogers WA, Charness N. Diffusion of technology: frequency of use for younger and older adults. Ageing Int. 2011 Mar;36(1):123–45. doi: 10.1007/s12126-010-9077-9. PubMed DOI PMC

Selwyn N, Gorard S, Furlong J, Madden L. Older adults' use of information and communications technology in everyday life. Ageing Soc. 2003 Sep 02;23(5):561–82. doi: 10.1017/S0144686X03001302. DOI

Knapova L, Klocek A, Elavsky S. The role of psychological factors in older adults' readiness to use eHealth technology: cross-sectional questionnaire study. J Med Internet Res. 2020 May 28;22(5):e14670. doi: 10.2196/14670. v22i5e14670 PubMed DOI PMC

Schroeder T, Haug M, Gewald H. Data privacy concerns using mHealth apps and smart speakers: comparative interview study among mature adults. JMIR Form Res. 2022 Jun 13;6(6):e28025. doi: 10.2196/28025. v6i6e28025 PubMed DOI PMC

Schoenborn NL, Van Pilsum Rasmussen SE, Xue QL, Walston JD, McAdams-Demarco MA, Segev DL, Boyd CM. Older adults' perceptions and informational needs regarding frailty. BMC Geriatr. 2018 Feb 13;18(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12877-018-0741-3. 10.1186/s12877-018-0741-3 PubMed DOI PMC

Lutz C, Tamó-Larrieux A. The robot privacy paradox: understanding how privacy concerns shape intentions to use social robots. Hum Mach Commun. 2020;1:87–111. doi: 10.30658/hmc.1.6. DOI

Juárez MR, González VM, Favela J. Effect of technology on aging perception. Health Informatics J. 2018 Jun;24(2):171–81. doi: 10.1177/1460458216661863. 1460458216661863 PubMed DOI

Cain M, Mittman R. Diffusion of innovation in health care. Institute for the Future. 2002. May, [2023-12-20]. https://collections.nlm.nih.gov/catalog/nlm:nlmuid-101155468-pdf .

Dearing JW, Cox JG. Diffusion of innovations theory, principles, and practice. Health Aff (Millwood) 2018 Feb;37(2):183–90. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1104. PubMed DOI