Home living older adults' subjective perceptions, evaluation, and interpretations of various welfare technology: A systematic review of qualitative studies

IF 2.2 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Zada Pajalic , Sofia Elisabeth G. Olsen , Annabel Hamre , Benedicte Sørensen Strøm , Celine Clausen , Diana Saplacan , Gunilla Kulla
{"title":"Home living older adults' subjective perceptions, evaluation, and interpretations of various welfare technology: A systematic review of qualitative studies","authors":"Zada Pajalic ,&nbsp;Sofia Elisabeth G. Olsen ,&nbsp;Annabel Hamre ,&nbsp;Benedicte Sørensen Strøm ,&nbsp;Celine Clausen ,&nbsp;Diana Saplacan ,&nbsp;Gunilla Kulla","doi":"10.1016/j.puhip.2024.100470","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This paper aims to map home-living older adults' subjective perceptions, evaluations, and interpretations of various welfare technologies.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>Systematic literature review.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The study was designed as a systematic literature review of qualitative studies. This systematic literature review was carried out according to the PRISMA statement and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO registration number CRD42020190206. The international electronic bibliographic databases included AMED, Academic, CINAHL, Cochrane Reviews, EMBASE, Google Scholar, MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The scientific evidence was synthesized using qualitative analysis. All aspects of the study method followed COREQ guidelines.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Following a detailed systematic search and screening of 1405 studies, 10 were included in the systematic review. The study shows that implementing Welfare Technology seems to prolong older adults' independent living in their own homes and was perceived as a complement to face-to-face contact with health care providers.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study indicated that older adults consider accepting Welfare Technology as it contributes to a sense of security and empowerment in their everyday lives.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34141,"journal":{"name":"Public Health in Practice","volume":"7 ","pages":"Article 100470"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666535224000077/pdfft?md5=2be7a930beb33f135837d6ba73ce655c&pid=1-s2.0-S2666535224000077-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666535224000077","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

This paper aims to map home-living older adults' subjective perceptions, evaluations, and interpretations of various welfare technologies.

Study design

Systematic literature review.

Methods

The study was designed as a systematic literature review of qualitative studies. This systematic literature review was carried out according to the PRISMA statement and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO registration number CRD42020190206. The international electronic bibliographic databases included AMED, Academic, CINAHL, Cochrane Reviews, EMBASE, Google Scholar, MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The scientific evidence was synthesized using qualitative analysis. All aspects of the study method followed COREQ guidelines.

Results

Following a detailed systematic search and screening of 1405 studies, 10 were included in the systematic review. The study shows that implementing Welfare Technology seems to prolong older adults' independent living in their own homes and was perceived as a complement to face-to-face contact with health care providers.

Conclusions

This study indicated that older adults consider accepting Welfare Technology as it contributes to a sense of security and empowerment in their everyday lives.

居家生活的老年人对各种福利技术的主观认知、评价和解释:定性研究的系统回顾
研究设计系统性文献综述方法本研究设计为定性研究的系统性文献综述。本系统性文献综述根据 PRISMA 声明进行,并在 PROSPERO 注册号 CRD42020190206 中进行了前瞻性注册。国际电子文献数据库包括 AMED、Academic、CINAHL、Cochrane Reviews、EMBASE、Google Scholar、MEDLINE via PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science。通过定性分析对科学证据进行了综合。研究方法的所有方面都遵循了 COREQ 指南。结果在对 1405 项研究进行详细的系统搜索和筛选后,有 10 项研究被纳入系统综述。研究表明,实施福利技术似乎可以延长老年人在自己家中独立生活的时间,并被视为与医疗服务提供者面对面接触的补充。结论这项研究表明,老年人考虑接受福利技术,因为它有助于在日常生活中增强安全感和能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Public Health in Practice
Public Health in Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
117
审稿时长
71 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信