Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40749105›Full record

ArticleJMIR nursing2025

Evaluating Social Assistive Robots in Clinical Nursing Care: Mixed Method Pilot Study on Health Care Workers' Perceptions and Adoption.

Janika Leoste, Kadi Lubi, Kristel Marmor, Katrin Kangur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Enhancing trust in healthcare robotics: implications derived from medical professionals' perspectives.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
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

4 authors.

Janika Leoste *IT College, Tallinn University of Technology, Ehitajate tee 5, Tallinn, 19086, Estonia, 372 5045081.ORCID 0000-0001-6919-0082
Kadi Lubi *Department of Healt Technologies, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia.ORCID 0000-0002-2546-0682
Kristel Marmor *IT College, Tallinn University of Technology, Ehitajate tee 5, Tallinn, 19086, Estonia, 372 5045081.ORCID 0009-0004-0937-513X
Katrin Kangur *IT College, Tallinn University of Technology, Ehitajate tee 5, Tallinn, 19086, Estonia, 372 5045081.ORCID 0009-0001-0172-5316

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The growing demand for older adults care due to aging populations and health care workforce shortages requires innovative solutions. Socially assistive robots (SARs) are increasingly explored for their potential to reduce workload by handling routine tasks. Yet, adoption can be hindered by various health care workers' concerns. Objective: This study examined the perceptions of health care workers toward SARs before and after a pilot use in a clinical nursing care setting. The study focused on SAR usability, emotional appropriateness, and readiness for adoption. Methods: A mixed methods pilot study was conducted at the East Tallinn Central Hospital's Nursing Care Clinic in collaboration with Tallinn University of Technology. The TEMI v3 (Robotemi) robot was used for 2 weeks for visitor guidance, goods delivery, and patrolling tasks. Health care workers filled in pre- and postintervention questionnaires with Likert-scale items and a broad open-ended question. Quantitative data were analyzed for changes in perceived safety, trust, and usability. Qualitative data underwent thematic analysis to understand participants' opinions. Results: Out of 45 involved health care workers, 20 completed the pretest questionnaire, and 5 completed the posttest questionnaire (a 75% attrition). Pretest results show that 17 of 20 (85%) participants had limited previous exposure to SARs and mixed perceptions of their role, with 9 (45%) viewing SARs as machines and 6 (30%) as somewhat human-like. Although 60% believed SARs could become mainstream within 5-10 years, there were concerns about the robot's emotional adequacy and job displacement. Posttest findings showed increased confidence in SARs, with all respondents perceiving them as safe tools. Qualitative results indicate improved trust and readiness to integrate SARs into daily routines, with 4 out of 5 (80%) being willing to advocate for SAR use. Still, participants noted limited impact on facilitating their jobs. Conclusions: The study indicates that short-term collaboration with SARs can enhance health care workers' confidence and their readiness for adoption. However, actual use would need proper emotional adequacy from the robot and aligning its functionalities with specific care needs. The future studies need to examine long-term impacts on care quality and job satisfaction, and also strategies to address generational differences and technophobia among health care staff. Transparent communication and proper training are required to ensure acceptance.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth PersonnelNursing CareRoboticsSelf-Help DevicesAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsSurveys and Questionnairesaging populationhuman-robot interactionnursingsocially assistive robotstechnology acceptance in healthcare

Identifiers

PMID40749105
PMCPMC12319256

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.