Working with a robot in hospital and long-term care homes: staff experience.

Although there is a growing literature on the use of telepresence robots in institutional dementia care settings, limited research focused on the perspectives of frontline staff members who deliver dementia care. Our objective was to understand staff perspectives on using telepresence robots to support residents with dementia and their families. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we conducted four focus groups and 11 semi-structured interviews across four long-term care (LTC) homes and one hospital in Canada. We included 22 interdisciplinary staff members (e.g., registered nurses, social workers, occupational therapists, recreational therapists) to understand their experiences with telepresence robots. Thematic analysis identified three key themes: 1) Staff Training and Support; 2) Robot Features; 3) Environmental dynamics for Implementation. Our results underscore the imperative of structural support at micro-, meso- and macro-levels for staff in dementia care settings to effectively implement technology. This study contributes to future research and practice by elucidating factors facilitating staff involvement in technology research, integrating staff voices into technology implementation planning, and devising strategies to provide structural support to staff, care teams, and care homes.

How can equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) principles be incorporated into research excellence with industry and community partners? Lessons learned from Canada and Australia on projects with a dementia focus.

BACKGROUND: The rapid advancement of gerontechnology, technologies for older adults, needs a collaboration that integrates the efforts of researchers, industry and community partners. Multisector collaboration fosters a holistic view of technologies, merging industry expertise, academic rigour, and the lived experiences of older adults and caregivers. This paper explores the role of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) perspectives in Patient and Public Involvement (PPI). METHODS: We present two case studies from Canada and Australia. Study One involves a dementia television project, and Study Two is an innovative rural dementia care project. Data sources included transcripts of the case studies' focus groups, research meeting notes, and associated study publications between 2021 and 2023 and 2016-2024, respectively. Utilizing Rolfe's reflective model, we reflected on lessons learned regarding challenges, strategies, and their implications for future research. Our analysis focused on two questions: (1) What were the common challenges of partnering with industry and PPI in the research process? And (2) How can EDI be applied to help overcome those challenges? RESULTS: Thematic analysis identified five common themes of challenges and ten practical strategies. The challenges are (1) experiential bias, (2) underrepresentation, (3) communication gaps, (4) mistrust and (5) power dynamics. Based on the lessons learned, we identified ten practical strategies using EDI principles: (1) seek diverse representation, (2) establish transparent agreements, (3) adopt inclusive language and cultural sensitivity, (4) apply flexibility to learn and adapt, (5) embed team reflection (6) take time to build trust and relationships, (7) facilitate meaningful engagement, (8) provide equitable recognition and opportunity, (9) foster a respectful environment for knowledge transfer, and (10) cultivate a long-term sustained relationship. CONCLUSION: The older population is diverse, and their needs are complex. EDI considerations contribute to fostering research excellence and maximizing the potential of PPI to develop technologies to improve aging experiences that truly meet the diverse needs of older adults for societal impact. Multisector collaboration requires clear communication and intentional efforts to build trust. EDI considerations should be embedded at every stage of the research process. This paper outlines common challenges, strategies, and implications as practical tips for future research and practice.

BACKGROUND: The development of technologies for older adults needs a collaboration that integrates the efforts of researchers, industry and community partners. This paper explores the role of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) perspectives in Patient and Public Involvement (PPI). METHODS: We present two case studies from Canada and Australia. Study One involves a dementia television project, and Study Two is an innovative rural dementia care project. We reflected on lessons learned regarding challenges, strategies, and their implications for future research. Our analysis focused on two questions: 1) What were the common challenges of partnering with industry and PPI in the research process? And 2) How can EDI be applied to help overcome those challenges? RESULTS: We identified five common themes of challenges and ten practical strategies. The challenges are (1) implicit bias, (2) underrepresentation, (3) communication gaps, (4) mistrust and (5) power dynamics. Based on the lessons learned, we identified ten practical strategies using EDI principles: (1) recruit for diverse representation, (2) establish transparent agreements, (3) incorporate inclusive language and cultural sensitivity, (4) apply flexibility to learn and adapt, (5) embed team reflection (6) take time to build trust and relationships, (7) facilitate meaningful engagement, (8) ensure equitable recognition (9) foster a respectful environment for shared learning, and (10) cultivate a long-term sustained relationship. CONCLUSION: This paper outlines common challenges, strategies, and implications as practical tips for future research and practice.

Participatory development of a framework to actively involve people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals in conducting a systematic review: the DECIDE-SR protocol.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews summarize and evaluate relevant studies to contribute to evidence-based practice. Internationally, researchers have reached a consensus that the active involvement of the public leads to better research. Despite this agreement, there are many reviews of research concerning healthcare interventions intended to promote the care of people living with dementia and those from their social network (e.g., close contacts, both family and non-family members) primarily involve only healthcare professionals and other experts. Due to the lack of a dementia-sensitive framework to actively involve people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals as co-researchers in systematic reviews, it is important to develop a framework to inform practice. METHODS: For this framework development process, we will recruit four people living with dementia and a total of four people from their social network, and three healthcare professionals working in acute or long-term care settings. We will conduct regular meetings with these groups of the public and healthcare professionals to include them in all stages of the systematic review. We will also identify and develop methods necessary to ensure meaningful involvement. The results will be documented and analyzed for the development of a framework. For the planning and preparation for these meetings, as well as the conduct of the meetings themselves, we will be guided by the principles of the INVOLVE approach. In addition, the ACTIVE framework will be used to guide the degree of involvement and the stage in the review process. DISCUSSION: We assume that our transparent approach to the development of a framework to support the active involvement of people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals in systematic reviews will serve as an impetus for and provide guidance to other researchers with the goal of increasing researchers' focus on this topic and facilitating systematic reviews that apply participatory approaches. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration is unnecessary as no intervention study will be conducted.

Systematic reviews summarize and evaluate studies on a particular topic. They provide information, for example, regarding whether an intervention is beneficial. This type of review is particularly important for healthcare professionals because they can use the results of the review to guide their actions. There is a growing awareness that the public, including people living with dementia and those from their social network (e.g., relatives, friends), need to be actively involved in the process of preparing these reviews when they are concerned with the topic of the reviews. Despite this consensus, it is often the case that only healthcare professionals are involved in such reviews. At present, no framework for the active involvement of people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals in systematic reviews has been developed. Therefore, we will develop such a framework together in collaboration with a range of members of the public and healthcare professionals. For this purpose, in addition to healthcare professionals, we will involve people living with dementia and those from their social network. Over the course of several meetings, we will engage in discussion with them and identify the stages of the process of conducting a systematic review in which their involvement as members of the researcher team is meaningful. We will furthermore identify the requirements associated with such an active involvement. A written report of these discussions will be produced in collaboration with the group. This will contribute towards the development of a framework for other researchers. The framework will later be made available to the public free of charge to increase awareness of this topic and to contribute towards more frequent, well-organised and meaningful involvement of people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals in systematic reviews.