Perceptions of staff and leadership teams on implementation of telepresence robots in long‐term care: a qualitative descriptive study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background COVID‐19’s physical distancing mandates have increased the likelihood of experiencing social isolation and loneliness for residents in long‐term care (LTC), especially those living with dementia. Social isolation correlates with health risks, including depression and cognitive decline. Telepresence robots can be remotely driven and facilitate social interactions through videoconferencing. Researchers have begun to explore opportunities of using these robots in the healthcare field; however, there is a research gap on examining factors influencing their implementation in LTC from the perspectives of key stakeholders. This qualitative descriptive study focuses on exploring LTC staff and leadership teams’ perspectives on facilitators and barriers to implementing telepresence robots. Method We employed purposive and snowballing methods to recruit 22 participants from two LTC homes in British Columbia, Canada: operational and unit leaders, and interdisciplinary staff including nursing staff, care aides and allied health practitioners. Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided our data collection and analysis. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted by virtual meetings. Thematic analysis was performed to identify themes. Result Analysis of the data produced three themes: (a) perceived needs and values for family‐resident connections, (b) engagement through conversation and partnership, and (c) confidence with training and timely support. Based on the findings and CFIR guidance, we offer a preliminary conceptual tool “START”: Share benefits and successes; Tailor policies and plans with staff partners; Acknowledge and address staff concerns; Repeated training and demonstrations; and Timely technical support. Conclusion This study offers pragmatic insights into staff and leadership teams’ perceptions of facilitators and barriers of implementing telepresence robots in LTC. The complexity of technology implementation will require executive and leadership teams to consider additional factors beyond the Plan‐Do‐Study‐Act (PDSA) cycle.
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 | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".