Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42089026›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026

Promotion and preservation of mobility and autonomy in old age through smart rollators-a qualitative study.

Patrick Schwaiger, Julia Müller, Martin Obert, Stefan Twieg, Andreas Butkov, Ulrike Steinmann, Denny Paulicke, Patrick Jahn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Patrick Schwaiger *Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University Medicine Halle (Saale), Research Group for Health Services Research, Nursing in Hospitals, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Julia Müller *Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University Medicine Halle (Saale), Research Group for Health Services Research, Nursing in Hospitals, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Martin ObertDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Engineering, Anhalt University of Applied Sciences, Köthen, Germany.
Stefan TwiegDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Engineering, Anhalt University of Applied Sciences, Köthen, Germany.
Andreas ButkovFaculty of Electrical and Information Engineering, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Institute of Automation Engineering, Magdeburg, Germany.
Ulrike SteinmannFaculty of Electrical and Information Engineering, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Institute of Automation Engineering, Magdeburg, Germany.
Denny PaulickeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University Medicine Halle (Saale), Research Group for Health Services Research, Nursing in Hospitals, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Patrick JahnDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University Medicine Halle (Saale), Research Group for Health Services Research, Nursing in Hospitals, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Diseases and health limitations associated with ageing often result in loss of mobility and reduced social participation. The ongoing demographic shift towards an increasingly ageing population, combined with a declining number of healthcare professionals, highlights the need to integrate digital assistive solutions to reduce workload and healthcare costs. Smart rollators (SRs) equipped with sensor-based assistance systems (SAS) are considered a promising innovation for enhancing safety, mobility, and independence in older adults. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore the needs, experiences, and perspectives of rollator users (RU) and healthcare professionals (HP) in order to identify and evaluate user-centred requirements for the iterative development of a smart rollator. Methods: As part of a broader research project, a design-based research (DBR) approach was applied. Five focus groups with a total of 30 participants (15 RU, 15 HP) were conducted using semi-structured interviews, which were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Data collection occurred in two phases: first, to explore user requirements, and subsequently, to evaluate an initial SR prototype. The analysis followed a content-structuring approach, conducted independently by two researchers. Results: Three main categories emerged from the focus groups: use of the rollator in daily life, sensor-based assistance systems, and the application of digital assistive technologies. Participants generally assessed the integration of digital and sensor-based functions positively, provided that these increased perceived safety and remained easy to use. Desired features included navigation, environmental and fall detection, emergency call functionality, lighting, and haptic feedback. Barriers were primarily related to technological scepticism, limited digital literacy, and potential cognitive overload. Facilitating factors included training, simple user interfaces, and modular system structures. Conclusion: The findings indicate that participatory development processes are essential for improving the acceptance of smart rollators. Early involvement of users and nursing professionals ensures that technological innovations are designed to be practical, safe, and needs-oriented. The design-based research approach represents a suitable framework for the iterative development and evaluation of assistive technologies in healthcare settings.

Indexed as

assistive technologiesdesign-based researchnursingparticipatory developmentsmart rollators

Identifiers

PMID42089026
PMCPMC13136103

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.