Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T02:18:36.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Group activity with Paro in nursing homes: systematic investigation of behaviors in participants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2016

Nina Jøranson ,
Ingeborg Pedersen ,
Anne Marie Mork Rokstad ,
Geir Aamodt ,
Christine Olsen  and
Camilla Ihlebæk
Nina Jøranson*
Affiliation:
Department of Landscape Architecture and Spatial Planning, Section for Public Health Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås, Norway
Ingeborg Pedersen
Affiliation:
Department of Landscape Architecture and Spatial Planning, Section for Public Health Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås, Norway
Anne Marie Mork Rokstad
Affiliation:
Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Ageing and Health, Vestfold Hospital Trust, Tønsberg, Norway Faculty of Health Sciences and Social Care, Molde University College, Molde, Norway
Geir Aamodt
Affiliation:
Department of Landscape Architecture and Spatial Planning, Section for Public Health Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås, Norway
Christine Olsen
Affiliation:
Department of Landscape Architecture and Spatial Planning, Section for Public Health Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås, Norway
Camilla Ihlebæk
Affiliation:
Department of Landscape Architecture and Spatial Planning, Section for Public Health Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås, Norway Faculty of Health and Social studies, Østfold University College, Fredrikstad, Norway
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Nina Jøranson, Department of Landscape Architecture and Spatial Planning, Section for Public Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås, Norway. Phone: +47 67 23 12 59; Fax: +47 64 96 50 01. Email: nina.joranson@vid.no.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

A variety of group activities is promoted for nursing home (NH) residents with dementia with the aim to reduce apathy and to increase engagement and social interaction. Investigating behaviors related to these outcomes could produce insights into how the activities work. The aim of this study was to systematically investigate behaviors seen in people with dementia during group activity with the seal robot Paro, differences in behaviors related to severity of dementia, and to explore changes in behaviors.

Methods:

Thirty participants from five NHs formed groups of five to six participants at each NH. Group sessions with Paro lasted for 30 minutes twice a week during 12 weeks of intervention. Video recordings were conducted in the second and tenth week. An ethogram, containing 18 accurately defined and described behaviors, mapped the participants’ behaviors. Duration of behaviors, such as “Observing Paro,” “Conversation with Paro on the lap,” “Smile/laughter toward other participants,” were converted to percentage of total session time and analyzed statistically.

Results:

“Observing Paro” was observed more often in participants with mild to moderate dementia (p = 0.019), while the variable “Observing other things” occurred more in the group of severe dementia (p = 0.042). “Smile/laughter toward other participants” showed an increase (p = 0.011), and “Conversations with Paro on the lap” showed a decrease (p = 0.014) during the intervention period.

Conclusions:

Participants with severe dementia seemed to have difficulty in maintaining attention toward Paro during the group session. In the group as a whole, Paro seemed to be a mediator for increased social interactions and created engagement.

Keywords

Parodementiaethogramvideo analysisgroup activityhuman–robot interaction
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 28 , Issue 8 , August 2016 , pp. 1345 - 1354
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bernabei, V. et al. (2013). Animal-assisted interventions for elderly patients affected by dementia or psychiatric disorders: a review. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 47, 762–773. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2012.12.014.Google Scholar
Chang, W.-L., Šabanović, S. and Huber, L. (2013). Situated analysis of interactions between cognitively impaired older adults and the therapeutic robot PARO. In Herrmann, G., Pearson, M., Lenz, A., Bremner, P., Spiers, A. and Leonards, U. (eds.), Social Robotics (pp. 371–380). Bristol: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Cohen-Mansfield, J., Dakheel-Ali, M. and Marx, M. S. (2009). Engagement in persons with dementia: the concept and its measurement. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry: Official Journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry, 17, 299–307. doi: 10.1097/JGP.0b013e31818f3a52.Google Scholar
Egan, M., Hobson, S. and Fearing, V. G. (2006). Dementia and occupation: a review of the literature. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73, 132–140. doi: 10.2182/cjot.05.0015.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engedal, K. and Haugen, P. K. (2009). Demens: Fakta og Utfordringer: En Lærebok. Tønsberg: Aldring og helse.Google Scholar
Feil-Seifer, D. and Mataric, M. J. (2005). Defining socially assistive robotics. IEEE 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (pp. 465–468). New York, NY: IEEE.Google Scholar
Giusti, L. and Marti, P. (2006). Interpretative dynamics in human robot interaction. The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2006. ROMAN 2006 (pp. 111–116). Hatfield: IEEE.Google Scholar
Hasselkus, B. R. (1998). Occupation and well-being in dementia: the experience of day-care staff. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52, 423–434. doi: 10.5014/ajot.52.6.423.Google Scholar
Hughes, C. P., Berg, L., Danziger, W. L., Coben, L. A. and Martin, R. L. (1982). A new clinical-scale for the staging of dementia. British Journal of Psychiatry, 140, 566–572. doi: 10.1192/bjp.140.6.566.Google Scholar
Joranson, N., Pedersen, I., Rokstad, A. M. M. and Ihlebaek, C. (2015). Effects on symptoms of agitation and depression in persons with dementia participating in robot-assisted activity: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 16, 867–873. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2015. 05.002.Google Scholar
Klein, B. and Cook, G. (2012). Emotional robotics in elder care – a comparison of findings in the UK and Germany. In Ge, S., Khatib, O., Cabibihan, J.-J., Simmons, R. and Williams, M.-A. (eds.), Social Robotics (pp. 108–117). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Kverno, K. S., Black, B. S., Nolan, M. T. and Rabins, P. V. (2009). Research on treating neuropsychiatric symptoms of advanced dementia with non-pharmacological strategies, 1998–2008: a systematic literature review. International psychogeriatrics, 21, 825–843. doi: 10.1017/S1041610209990196.Google Scholar
Livingston, G. et al. (2014). Non-pharmacological interventions for agitation in dementia: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. British Journal of Psychiatry, 205, 436–442. doi: DOI 10.1192/bjp.bp.113.141119.Google Scholar
Marti, P., Bacigalupo, M., Giusti, L., Mennecozzi, C. and Shibata, T. (2006). Socially assistive robotics in the treatment of behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia. 1st Ieee Ras-Embs International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (pp. 483–488). Pisa: IEEE.Google Scholar
Ministry of Health and Care Services (2011). Innovation in the care services. Oslo: Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet.Google Scholar
Mordoch, E., Osterreicher, A., Guse, L., Roger, K. and Thompson, G. (2013). Use of social commitment robots in the care of elderly people with dementia: a literature review. Maturitas, 74, 14–20. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2012.10.015.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perkins, J., Bartlett, H., Travers, C. and Rand, J. (2008). Dog-assisted therapy for older people with dementia: a review. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 27, 177–182. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-6612.2008.00317.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Péter, A. (2014). Solomon coder. A simple and free solution for behavior coding. Available at: http://solomoncoder.com/; last accessed 25 August 2015.Google Scholar
Robinson, H., Broadbent, E. and MacDonald, B. (2015a). Group sessions with Paro in a nursing home: structure, observations and interviews. Australasian Journal on Ageing, doi: 10.1111/ajag.12199.Google Scholar
Robinson, H., MacDonald, B. and Broadbent, E. (2015b). Physiological effects of a companion robot on blood pressure of older people in residential care facility: a pilot study. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 34, 27–32. doi: 10.1111/ajag.12099.Google Scholar
Robinson, H., Macdonald, B., Kerse, N. and Broadbent, E. (2013). The psychosocial effects of a companion robot: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2013.02.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sabanovic, S., Bennett, C. C., Chang, W.-L. and Huber, L. (2013). PARO robot affects diverse interaction modalities in group sensory therapy for older adults with dementia. IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR) (pp. 1–6). Seattle, WA: IEEE.Google Scholar
Shibata, T., Wada, K., Saito, T. and Tanie, K. (2004). Robotic therapy at an elderly institution using a therapeutic robot. Annual Review of CyberTherapy and Telemedicine, 2, 125–136.Google Scholar
Strand, B. H., Tambs, K., Engedal, K., Bjertness, E., Selbaek, G. and Rosness, T. A. (2014). Hvor mange har demens i Norge? Tidsskrift for den norske Lægeforening, 134, 2. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.13.1601.Google Scholar
Takayanagi, K., Kirita, T. and Shibata, T. (2014). Comparison of verbal and emotional responses of elderly people with mild/moderate dementia and those with severe dementia in responses to seal robot, PARO. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 6. doi: 10.3389/Fnhum.2014.00257.Google Scholar
Troisi, A. (1999). Ethological research in clinical psychiatry: the study of nonverbal behavior during interviews. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 23, 905–913. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7634(99)00024-X.Google Scholar
Uvnäs-Moberg, K. (1998). Oxytocin may mediate the benefits of positive social interaction and emotions. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23, 819–835. doi: 10.1016/S0306-4530(98)00056-0.Google Scholar
Wada, K., Shibata, T., Kayoko, S. and Tanie, K. (2005). Quantitative analysis of utterance of elderly people in long-term robot assisted activity. IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2005. RO-MAN 2005 (pp. 267–272). Nashville: IEEE.Google Scholar
Wada, K., Shibata, T., Saito, T. and Tanie, K. (2004). Effects of robot-assisted activity for elderly people and nurses at a day service center. In Proceedings of the IEEE (pp. 1780–1788). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE-Inst Electrical Electronics Engineers Inc.Google Scholar
Williams, E. and Jenkins, R. (2008). Dog visitation therapy in dementia care: a literature review. Nursing Older People, 20, 31–35.Google Scholar