Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assistive Robotic Technology to Combat Social Isolation in Acute Hospital Settings

  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social isolation in hospitals is a well established risk factor for complications such as cognitive decline and depression. Assistive robotic technology has the potential to combat this problem, but first it is critical to investigate how hospital patients react to this technology. In order to address this question, we introduced a remotely operated NAO humanoid robot which conversed, made jokes, played music, danced and exercised with patients in a London hospital. In total, 49 patients aged between 18–100 took part in the study, 7 of whom had dementia. Our results show that a majority of patients enjoyed their interaction with NAO. We also found that age and dementia significantly affect the interaction, whereas gender does not. These results indicate that hospital patients enjoy socialising with robots, opening new avenues for future research into the potential health benefits of a social robotic companion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alemi M, Ghanbarzadeh A, Meghdari A, Moghadam LJ (2016) Clinical application of a humanoid robot in pediatric cancer interventions. Int J Soc Robot 8(5):743–759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0294-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Belpaeme T, Baxter PE, Read R, Wood R, Cuayáhuitl H, Kiefer B, Racioppa S, Kruijff-Korbayová I, Athanasopoulos G, Enescu V, Looije R, Neerincx M, Demiris Y, Ros R, Beck A, Cañamero L, Hiolle A, Lewis M, Baroni I, Nalin M, Cosi P, Paci G, Tesser F, Sommavilla G, Humbert R (2012) Multimodal child-robot interaction: building social bonds. J Hum-Robot Interact 1(2):33–53. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.1.2.Belpaeme

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Block L, Habicht R, Wu AW, Desai SV, Wang K, Silva KN, Niessen T, Oliver N, Feldman L (2013) In the wake of the 2003 and 2011 duty hours regulations, how do internal medicine interns spend their time? J Gen Intern Med 28(8):1042–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2376-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Demiris Y (2009) Knowing when to assist: developmental issues in lifelong assistive robotics. In: Proceedings of the annual conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society, pp 3357–3360. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2009.5333182

  5. European Commission (2012) Action plan for the EU health workforce. http://ec.europa.eu/health/workforce/policy

  6. Fasola J, Mataric MJ (2013) A socially assistive robot exercise coach for the elderly. J Hum-Robot Interact 2(2):3–32. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.2.2.Fasola

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Feil-Seifer D, Mataric MJ (2005) Defining socially assistive robotics. In: Proceedings of the international conference on rehabilitation robotics, pp 465–468. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICORR.2005.1501143

  8. Goetz J, Kiesler S, Powers A (2003) Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human–robot cooperation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, pp 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2003.1251796

  9. Hebesberger D, Koertner T, Gisinger C, Pripfl J (2017) A long-term autonomous robot at a care hospital: a mixed methods study on social acceptance and experiences of staff and older adults. Int J Soc Robot 9(3):417–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0391-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Heerink M, Kröse B, Evers V, Wielinga B (2010) Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model. Int J Soc Robot 2(4):361–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0068-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kanda T, Hirano T, Eaton D, Ishiguro H (2004) Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children: a field trial. Hum-Comput Interact 19(1):61–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaplan F (2004) Who is afraid of the humanoid? Investigating cultural differences in the acceptance of robots. Int J Humanoid Robot 1(3):465–480. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219843604000289

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Lowenthal MF (1964) Social isolation and mental illness in old age. Am Sociol Rev 29(1):54–70. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lu SC, Blackwell N, Do EYL (2011) mediRobbi: an interactive companion for pediatric patients during hospital visit. In: Human–computer interaction. Interaction techniques and environments. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 6762. Springer, pp 547–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21605-3_60

    Google Scholar 

  15. McColl D, Nejat G (2013) Meal-time with a socially assistive robot and older adults at a long-term care facility. J Hum-Robot Interact 2(1):152–171. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.2.1.McColl

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Michalowski MP, Sabanovic S, Kozima H (2007) A dancing robot for rhythmic social interaction. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction, pp 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1145/1228716.1228729

  17. Nikolaidis S, Ramakrishnan R, Gu K, Shah J (2015) Efficient model learning for human–robot collaborative tasks. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction, pp 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696455

  18. Ping L (1993) Wizard of Oz studies: why and how. In: Proceedings of the ACM international conference on intelligent user interfaces, pp 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1145/169891.169968

  19. Pulido JC, González JC, Suárez-Mejías C, Bandera A, Bustos P, Fernández F (2017) Evaluating the child–robot interaction of the naotherapist platform in pediatric rehabilitation. Int J Soc Robot 9(3):343–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0402-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Quigley M, Gerkey BP, Conley K, Faust J, Foote T, Leibs J, Berger E, Wheeler R, Ng A (2009) ROS: an open-source robot operating system. In: Proceedings of the open source software workshop at the international conference of robotics and automation

  21. Robinson H, MacDonald B, Kerse N, Broadbent E (2013) The psychosocial effects of a companion robot: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Dir Assoc 14(9):661–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2013.02.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Robinson H, Broadbent E, MacDonald B (2015) Group sessions with Paro in a nursing home: structure, observations and interviews. Australas J Ageing. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajag.12199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ros R, Baroni I, Demiris Y (2014) Adaptive human–robot interaction in sensorimotor task instruction: from human to robot dance tutors. Robot Auton Syst 62(6):707–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2014.03.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ros R, Oleari E, Pozzi C, Sacchitelli F, Baranzini D, Bagherzadhalimi A, Sanna A, Demiris Y (2016) A motivational approach to support healthy habits in long-term child–robot interaction. Int J Soc Robot 8(5):599–617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0356-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sarabia M, Demiris Y (2013) A humanoid robot companion for wheelchair users. In: Social robotics. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 8239. Springer, pp 432–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02675-6_43

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Sarabia M, Lee K, Demiris Y (2015) Towards a synchronised grammars framework for adaptive musical human–robot collaboration. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication, pp 715–721. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2015.7333649

  27. Schroeter C, Mueller S, Volkhardt M, Einhorn E, Huijnen C, Van Den Heuvel H, Van Berlo A, Bley A, Gross HM (2013) Realization and user evaluation of a companion robot for people with mild cognitive impairments. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 1153–1159. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2013.6630717

  28. Shah A, Herbert R, Lewis S, Mahendran R, Platt J, Bhattacharyya B (1997) Screening for depression among acutely ill geriatric inpatients with a short geriatric depression scale. Age Ageing 26(3):217–221. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/26.3.217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Siegel M, Breazeal C, Norton MI (2009) Persuasive robotics: the influence of robot gender on human behavior. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 2563–2568. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2009.5354116

  30. Storfjell JL, Omoike O, Ohlson S (2008) The balancing act: patient care time versus cost. J Nurs Adm 38(5):244–249. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NNA.0000312771.96610.df

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sung JY, Christensen HI, Grinter RE (2009) Robots in the wild: understanding long-term use. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction, pp 45–52. https://doi.org/10.1145/1514095.1514106

  32. Takayama L, Dooley D, Ju W (2011) Expressing thought: improving robot readability with animation principles. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction, pp 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1145/1957656.1957674

  33. Takayanagi K, Kirita T, 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. Front Aging Neurosci 6(257). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2014.00257

  34. Tapus A, Tapus C, Mataric MJ (2009) The use of socially assistive robots in the design of intelligent cognitive therapies for people with dementia. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on rehabilitation robotics, pp 23–26. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICORR.2009.5209501

  35. Valentí Soler M, Agüera-Ortiz L, Olazarán Rodríguez J, Mendoza Rebolledo C, Pérez Muñoz A, Rodríguez Pérez I, Osa Ruiz E, Barrios Sánchez A, Herrero Cano V, Carrasco Chillón L, Felipe Ruiz S, López Alvarez J, León Salas B, Cañas Plaza JM, Martín Rico F, Abella Dago G, Martínez Martín P (2015) Social robots in advanced dementia. Front Aging Neurosci 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2015.00133

  36. Wada K, Shibatal T, Musha T, Kimura S (2005) Effects of robot therapy for demented patients evaluated by EEG. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 1552–1557. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2005.1545304

  37. Wall M, Duffy A (2010) The effects of music therapy for older people with dementia. Br J Nurs 19(2):108–113. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2010.19.2.46295

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the staff at the Chelsea and Westminster Hospital for their support in conducting the trials. In particular, we thank Vino Loganathan and Naz Nordin for introducing Junior to the patients as well as Paulo Guiran Pestana and Rachel-Hannah Strong for their great effort documenting the interactions. Last but certainly not least, we would like to acknowledge all the patients who took part in the trials. This research was supported by: a Doctoral Training Award from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council to MS; a research fellowship from the Chelsea and Westminster Hospital to NY; Fund 556, Education & Research Fund from the CW Health Charity to Rachel Hannah-Strong and Paulo Guiran Pestana; and EU projects ALIZ-E (FP7-248116) and PAL (H2020-643783) to YD.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Personal Robotics Lab, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College, London, UK

    Miguel Sarabia & Yiannis Demiris

  2. Magill Department of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Management, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK

    Noel Young, Kelly Canavan & Marcela P. Vizcaychipi

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Westminster, London, UK

    Trudi Edginton

  4. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, UK

    Marcela P. Vizcaychipi

Authors
  1. Miguel Sarabia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Noel Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kelly Canavan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Trudi Edginton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yiannis Demiris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Marcela P. Vizcaychipi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miguel Sarabia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sarabia, M., Young, N., Canavan, K. et al. Assistive Robotic Technology to Combat Social Isolation in Acute Hospital Settings. Int J of Soc Robotics 10, 607–620 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0421-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0421-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation