Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33180024›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

Acceptability of Using a Robotic Nursing Assistant in Health Care Environments: Experimental Pilot Study.

Mohammad Nasser Saadatzi, M Cynthia Logsdon, Shamsudeen Abubakar, Sumit Das, Penelope Jankoski, Heather Mitchell, Diane Chlebowy, Dan O Popa

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mohammad Nasser SaadatziElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8489-9014
M Cynthia LogsdonSchool of Nursing, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6176-4237
Shamsudeen AbubakarElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2022-0081
Sumit DasElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0361-6970
Penelope JankoskiBiomedical Engineering Department, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0014-5555
Heather MitchellSchool of Nursing, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7246-0047
Diane ChlebowySchool of Nursing, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2123-3391
Dan O PopaElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2360-0020
University of Louisville · USCase Western Reserve University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccording to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, nurses will be the largest labor pool in the United States by 2022, and more than 1.1 million nursing positions have to be filled by then in order to avoid a nursing shortage. In addition, the incidence rate of musculoskeletal disorders in nurses is above average in comparison with other occupations. Robot-assisted health care has the potential to alleviate the nursing shortage by automating mundane and routine nursing tasks. Furthermore, robots in health care environments may assist with safe patient mobility and handling and may thereby reduce the likelihood of musculoskeletal disorders.

objectiveThis pilot study investigates the perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness (acceptability) of a customized service robot as determined by nursing students (as proxies for nursing staff in health care environments). This service robot, referred to as the Adaptive Robotic Nurse Assistant (ARNA), was developed to enhance the productivity of nurses through cooperation during physical tasks (eg, patient walking, item fetching, object delivery) as well as nonphysical tasks (eg, patient observation and feedback). This pilot study evaluated the acceptability of ARNA to provide ambulatory assistance to patients.

methodsWe conducted a trial with 24 participants to collect data and address the following research question: Is the use of ARNA as an ambulatory assistive device for patients acceptable to nurses? The experiments were conducted in a simulated hospital environment. Nursing students (as proxies for nursing staff) were grouped in dyads, with one participant serving as a nurse and the other acting as a patient. Two questionnaires were developed and administrated to the participants based on the Technology Acceptance Model with respect to the two subscales of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use metrics. In order to evaluate the internal consistency/reliability of the questionnaires, we calculated Cronbach alpha coefficients. Furthermore, statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate the relation of each variable in the questionnaires with the overall perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use metrics.

resultsBoth Cronbach alpha values were acceptably high (.93 and .82 for perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use questionnaires, respectively), indicating high internal consistency of the questionnaires. The correlation between the variables and the overall perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use metrics was moderate. The average perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use metrics among the participants were 4.13 and 5.42, respectively, out of possible score of 7, indicating a higher-than-average acceptability of this service robot.

conclusionsThe results served to identify factors that could affect nurses' acceptance of ARNA and aspects needing improvement (eg, flexibility, ease of operation, and autonomy level).

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHumansMaleNursing AssistantsPilot ProjectsReproducibility of ResultsRoboticsSelf-Help DevicesUnited Statespatient walkingrobot-assisted healthcarerobotic nurse assistanttechnology acceptance modeluser acceptability

Identifiers

PMID33180024
PMCPMC7691087
OpenAlexW3080851885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.