Can technology-assisted toilets improve hygiene and independence in geriatric rehabilitation? A cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate whether technology-assisted toilets (TATs) could be used to improve toileting hygiene and independence for geriatric rehabilitation patients. TATs are commercially available toilet seats that use a stream of warm water to clean the user, have a fan for drying and are operated by a remote control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five geriatric rehabilitation in-patients were recruited, six completed the study, and seven partially completed the study. Each participant had two trial bowel movements. One trial involved cleaning themselves with toilet paper; the other involved cleaning themselves with the TAT functions. After each trial, participants received a visual inspection for cleanliness and answered the Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS), a validated scale, to assess their sense of competence, adaptability and self-esteem in the bathroom. A toileting cleanliness scale, designed for this study, was completed by a nurse after TAT usage. Participants received a score from 1 (completely clean) to 4 (completely soiled) based on a visual inspection after cleaning. RESULTS: TAT and toileting cleanliness scores were similar. PIADS scores showed a trend towards higher scores when using the TAT, but results were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: TATs cleaned as well as standard toileting in geriatric rehabilitation inpatients. Participants indicated that TATs improved their sense of competence, adaptability and self-esteem. Geriatricians and rehabilitation professionals should consider prescribing TATs in their practice as an assistive device in order to promote patient independence and dignity and reduce the burden of care for patients requiring toileting assistance. Implications for rehabilitation Technology-assisted toilets (TATs) are commercially-available toilet seats that could be used to allow rehabilitation patients to clean themselves more independently in the bathroom. Improved toileting independence can reduce burden of care of geriatric rehabilitation and reduce the impact of toileting assistance on patient dignity and self-esteem. Physiatrists should consider recommending TATs to their patients but should take into account whether a patient's particular set of disabilities will allow them to use a TAT effectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".