MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4390229078 · doi:10.1080/17483107.2023.2295946

Assessing virtual reality acceptance in long-term care facilities: a quantitative study with older adults

2023· article· en· W4390229078 sur OpenAlexaff
Marjan Hosseini, Roanne Thomas, Lara A. Pilutti, Pascal Fallavollita, Jeffrey W. Jutai

Notice bibliographique

RevueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Ottawa
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésVirtual realityLong-term careTerm (time)PsychologyAssisted livingTechnology acceptance modelSocial acceptanceApplied psychologyGerontologyComputer scienceMedicineHuman–computer interactionSocial psychologyUsability

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Our study aimed to investigate the factors associated with the acceptance of virtual reality (VR) games among older adults living in LTC, with a particular emphasis on identifying social and individual factors that have been overlooked in existing technology acceptance models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted VR gaming sessions, followed by a composite questionnaire to explore the factors associated with the acceptance of VR games among residents of LTC with a focus on technology acceptance models (TAM) and social factors derived from Selective Optimization with Compensation (SOC) theory and Socioemotional Selectivity Theory (SST). RESULTS: We studied 20 older adults aged 65 and older. Participants were moderately sedentary, with the majority of them having prior gaming experience. Participants with prior gaming experience had higher mean scores in most SOC theory and SST subscales, except for elective selection. Participants perceived the technology as useful and easy to use, with no heightened gaming-related anxiety. Significant correlations were found between perceived ease of use and selection strategies, and between attitudes towards gaming and elective selection strategies. No significant score differences were observed between male and female participants. CONCLUSIONS: The positive correlation between VR acceptance and using SOC strategies suggests a positive response to straightforward experiences. Our study highlights VR exergaming's potential benefits for encouraging LTC residents' engagement in valued activities and pursuing goals. Moreover, social theories of aging can inform technology acceptance and guide the design and marketing of VR exergames to better suit older adults' needs and preferences in LTC.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe findings of this study have important implications for rehabilitation programs aimed at enhancing physical activity (PA) and engagement among older adults living in long-term care (LTC) facilities. The use of virtual reality (VR) games can be an important tool to promote PA and improve the overall well-being of LTC residents. Based on the results, the following implications can be drawn:Integrating VR exergaming in rehabilitation:The positive perception of VR technology's usefulness and ease of use among older adults in LTC suggests that VR exergaming can be effectively integrated into rehabilitation programs. Healthcare professionals and rehabilitation specialists in LTC facilities can consider incorporating VR-based exercise routines and gaming sessions to motivate and engage residents in physical activities. By doing so, they can create enjoyable and interactive rehabilitation experiences that may lead to improved adherence to exercise regimens.Addressing social factors for VR acceptance:Our study highlights the significance of social factors derived from theories of aging, such as Selective Optimization with Compensation (SOC) and Socioemotional Selectivity Theory (SST), in influencing VR acceptance among LTC residents. Rehabilitation programs should take into account these social aspects and create a supportive and encouraging environment for older adults to engage with VR exergames. Encouraging social interactions and providing opportunities for residents to share their experiences with VR gaming may enhance acceptance and overall engagement.Tailoring VR exergames for older adults:The correlation between VR acceptance and the use of SOC strategies indicates that customized experiences may be well-received by LTC residents. Game developers and rehabilitation specialists should consider designing VR exergames that align with the specific preferences and needs of older adults. This could involve providing choices and options for users to optimize their gaming experiences based on their individual abilities and interests.Recognizing gaming experience:Our study highlights that prior gaming experience positively influenced participants' attitudes towards VR gaming. Rehabilitation professionals should acknowledge and leverage this prior experience when introducing VR exergaming to older adults in LTC. By incorporating elements familiar to older adults or providing guidance for those new to gaming, rehabilitation programs can foster a more seamless and enjoyable transition to VR exergames.Promoting goal pursuit and valued activities:Our study suggests that VR exergaming has the potential to encourage LTC residents' engagement in valued activities and goal pursuit. Rehabilitation programs can utilize VR exergaming as a means to help residents achieve specific rehabilitation goals and engage in activities that are meaningful to them. This approach can contribute to a sense of purpose and satisfaction in the rehabilitation process.Overall, the integration of VR exergaming in rehabilitation for older adults in LTC facilities has promising implications for improving physical activity levels, enhancing engagement, and addressing the holistic well-being of residents. By considering the social factors influencing VR acceptance and tailoring experiences to individual preferences, rehabilitation professionals can optimize the potential benefits of VR technology in LTC settings.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,111
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,869

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,345
Écart entre enseignants0,322 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations21
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive TechnologyMême sujetVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsTravaux en français237 207