Search results

Telecare services have evolved from community alarm systems into sophisticated methods of supporting the health and well‐being of many vulnerable groups. Their potential for extending this role may be supported by the integration of services involving all telecare alarm services, primary care services and community equipment stores. The key to integration may be the expanded role of the 24‐hour monitoring centres to provide case review facilities that allow prevention services to be offered following an emergency, as well as the issuing of standalone telecare devices. The potential for successful integration may be governed by the level of training provided for call handling staff, and by the creation of specialist centres using virtualisation technologies.

The term assistive technology (AT) is relatively new but its origins go back a long way. Some of the elements of assistive technology, such as aids and adaptations, have been a feature of policies for many years. Before the late 1990s it was more usual to focus on the most common types ‐ telephones, alarms, aids and adaptations. More recently telemedicine and smart houses have come to the fore in policies and research. What is confusing now is that a variety of other terms are being used. In this paper the development of these terms in recent policies and the changing terminology are traced. It is suggested that a narrow interpretation can play down the important role of AT in enabling older people to maintain their independence but that it must be seen in conjunction with other services, especially housing.

The development of telecare services across the UK has been supported by grants from the respective governments of Scotland and Wales, and by the DH in England. New services are being established to sometimes operate alongside existing community equipment services and community alarm services. Elsewhere they are embracing a wider range of services including rehabilitation, intermediate care and health services designed to reduce the use of unscheduled care services. This paper discusses the difficulties in understanding the scope of telecare services, and the definitions of services that will need to be confirmed so that service users can choose appropriately if offered direct payments. Two different service models are offered, one of which uses telehealth as an umbrella term to cover all telecare, e‐care and m‐care, and telemedicine where the former includes all such services offered in the service user's home, including those of a medical nature. The second model views telecare alongside assistive technologies and telemedicine as one of three different technology groups designed to make people more independent or to bring care closer to home. There is significant overlap between the three groups, which justifies the introduction of a new term ‐ ARTS (assistive and remote technology services) ‐ to describe this area of support.

The development of telecare services in the UK has been supported by grants from the respective governments of Scotland and Wales, and by the Department of Health in England. New services are being established, sometimes to operate alongside existing community equipment services and community alarm services. Elsewhere they are embracing a wider range of services including rehabilitation, intermediate care and health services designed to reduce use of unscheduled care services. This paper discusses the difficulties in understanding the scope of telecare services, and the definitions of services that will need to be confirmed if service users are to be able to choose appropriately if offered direct payments. Two service models are offered, one of which uses telehealth as an umbrella term to cover all telecare, e‐care and m‐care, and telemedicine, where the former includes all such services offered in the service user's home, including those of a medical nature. The second model views telecare alongside assistive technologies and telemedicine as one of three technology groups designed to make people more independent, or to bring care closer to home. There is significant overlap between the three groups, which justifies the introduction of a new term ‐ ARTS (assistive and remote technology services) ‐ to describe this area of support.

Most local authorities now offer a telecare service to people who are eligible for community services under Fair Access to Care Services (FACS). Others also offer telecare in a prevention mode to people with lower levels of risk alongside traditional social (or community) alarm systems. A survey of local authorities, mainly members of the Centre for Usable Home Technologies (CUHTec), was performed to gauge the service provision options available and the charging strategies that have been adopted. Results from 39 authorities across the UK indicate significant differences between English shire counties and the unitary authorities elsewhere in the country in terms of eligibility and provision. The majority of authorities have yet to confirm a charging policy, using the principle of ‘pilot project’ to delay a decision until their Preventative Technology Grant (PTG) or telecare grants have run out. Some authorities with more mature services have chosen to make telecare free to particular groups on the grounds that they will reduce costs elsewhere in the health and/or social care economy. Most are introducing charges in the range of £5 to £10 per week indicating a generous subsidy from the council.

This study aims to provide insights into the scale and use of information and communication technology (ICT) in managing medical devices in the National Health Service (NHS), with a focus on reverse exchange (RE) systems as a part of the broader reverse logistics (RL) systems, within which medical devices are returned and exchanged.

Two case studies were conducted with NHS Hospital Trusts, whilst another was built upon secondary resources. Primary findings were triangulated with the information collected from the NHS Trusts’ reports, direct observation and a preliminary round of consultations with 12 health-care professionals working in other NHS Trusts or Integrated Equipment Community Services.

The findings of this paper suggest that the sophistication of ICT implementation increases with the risks and value associated with medical devices. Operational attributes are derived from ICT implementations which can positively affect RE performance. The forces that drive the adoption of ICT in the NHS include pressure from government, business partners and patients; competitive pressure; perceived benefits; organisation size; top management support; and the availability of sufficient resources. Obstacles are mainly centred around the lack of sufficient resources.

Although the trusts that participated in this research are representative of different regions, the generalisation of the study results may be limited by the size of the sample organisations, so the results can only provide insights into the research problem. As this work is exploratory in nature, there is insufficient data on which to form definitive recommendations.

NHS Trusts may use the six operational attributes identified and verified by the case studies to benchmark their ICT implementation for device management. The actual and potential benefits of ICT implementation could inform technology development and encourage the uptake of ICT in healthcare. Governmental bodies can utilise this information to develop directives to actively drive ICT adoption in device management and the associated RE system. A well-considered training programme is needed to improve staff ICT skills to fully realise the potential of ICT systems which support the effective RE of medical devices.

The results of this paper suggest that the reverse management of medical devices backs up the supply chain attained through using ICT, which in turn reduces capital costs, medical risk and increases the finance available for frontline medical treatment.

This paper raises the debate about integration of services, drawing on the experience of the occupational therapy profession. This is followed by a review of the roles and responsibilities of all staff within the integration agenda.

One important element for effective local disaster risk management (DRM) is community participation. However, this is not automatic in Costa Rica. Moreover, communities do not always continue DRM activities after a project or promotional campaign by the government. Indeed, little knowledge exists regarding long-term project sustainability of local DRM activities. Based on this, the present chapter discusses whether and how communities realize long-term DRM activities, an important factor for enhancing local DRM capacity, in a sustainable manner. The study conducts semi-structured interviews in the communities in Cartago City, Costa Rica as a means of evaluation; these are communities where the local DRM project has been implemented for more than ten years.

Cartago City is located in the central valley of Costa Rica. Situated at the southern foot of the Irazu volcano and characterized by rugged mountainous topography, the city in general is exposed to multiple natural hazards including floods, volcanic eruption, and pyroclastic flows. Indeed, the city has experienced catastrophes in 1724, 1861, 1891, 1928, and 1951. The most recent one was a combination of pyroclastic flows and several floods in 1963–1964. This catastrophe caused US$3.5 million of economic damage as well as 20 deaths (ICE, 1966).

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the design, implementation, and pilot of a Mobile Makerspace at a private, southeastern liberal arts institution that did not have a campus-wide makerspace. In an effort to give students in a residential hall access to maker tools and technologies and also meet the needs of a campus-wide writing initiative, a team of administrators and staff worked to build and design programing for the “MobileMaker,” a pop-up Mobile Makerspace.

The authors explain how the equipment was chosen based on a variety of user skill levels. The technical specifications of the MobileMaker are also detailed, which includes 3D printing and crafting tools, and a variety of electronics. In addition, they explain how a mobile cart was modified to house and secure the equipment so it could be stored in an unsecured area. The team experienced several challenges with the MobileMaker project, including the overall durability of the mobile cart and the lack of a dedicated staff to manage the equipment.

The authors conclude that mobility and security were mutually exclusive with the mobile design that was chosen. Greater mobility was sacrificed to achieve greater security via locked doors and compartments that added weight to the cart. While the goal of increased student access to maker tools and technologies was met, the level of access was often limited due to staffing limitations.

An unanticipated outcome of the project was the conversations that were generated about the need and demand for a dedicated makerspace open to the entire campus community.