Perspectives of Japanese elders and their healthcare providers on use of wearable technology to monitor their health at home: A qualitative exploration

Abstract

BACKGROUND: With 24 million Japanese elderly aging at home, the challenges of managing chronic conditions are significant. As many Japanese elders manage multiple chronic conditions, investigating the usefulness of wearable health devices for this population is warranted. AIM: The purpose of this qualitative study, using grounded theory, was to explore the perspectives of Japanese elders, their caretakers, and their healthcare providers on the use of technology and wearable devices to monitor health conditions and keep Japanese elders safe at home. METHODS: In conducting this study, a community advisory board was first established to guide the research design; six focus groups and two one-on-one interviews were conducted, with a total of 21 participants. RESULTS: Four major themes emerged from the analysis: 1) Current Status of Health Issues Experienced by Japanese Elders and Ways of Being Monitored; 2) Current Use of Monitoring Technology and Curiosity about Use of the Latest Digital Technology to Keep Elderly Healthy at Home; 3) Perceived Advantages of Wearing Sensor Technology; and 4) Perceived Disadvantages of Wearing Technology. Many of the elderly participants were interested in using monitoring devices at home, particularly if not complicated. Healthcare workers found monitoring technologies particularly useful during the isolation of the COVID-19 pandemic. Elderly participants felt cost and technical issues could be barriers to using monitoring devices. CONCLUSION: While there are challenges to utilizing monitoring devices, the potential to aid the aging population of Japan justifies further investigation into the effectiveness of these devices. This study was not registered with a research trial registry.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 38 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.