Skip to main content

Table 4 Summary of barriers and facilitators

From: Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of social robots for older adults and people with dementia: a scoping review

CFIR construct Barrier(s) Facilitator(s)
Domain 1. Innovation Characteristics
 1.1 Relative advantage • Relative cost as compared to other technology [70]
• Less audibility [38, 75, 76]
• Sense of presence [38, 70, 74,75,76]
• Mobility aspect [74].
• More conducive for people with dementia [70, 74]
• Maintenance-free [60, 72]
• Proactivity [56]
• Economic advantage [59]
 1.2 Adaptability • Vocalisations [83]
• Functions [45]
• User interface or interaction [41, 46, 53, 63]
• Physical inaccessibility [41, 47, 59, 68, 74, 77, 78, 81, 84]
• Physical accessibility [41, 74]
• Customisability of interactivity or functions [47, 64]
 1.3 Complexity • Pre-programmed instructions [39, 46]
• Complicated functions [39, 41, 75,76,77, 83, 85, 88]
• Compose or program activities [61]
• Multimodal interaction features [41, 67, 75, 76]
• Ease of use [39,40,41, 52, 57, 59,60,61, 65, 68, 74, 76, 81, 88]
 1.4 Design quality and packaging • Audio and speech issues [39,40,41, 43, 46, 47, 53, 63, 71, 74,75,76, 81, 84, 86, 88, 89],
• Hardware problems [43, 58, 70]
• Unreliable functions [39, 40, 43, 45, 46, 58, 59, 65, 71, 81, 85, 89, 90],
• Unpredictable intentions
[39, 40, 43, 51]
• Other technical difficulties [43, 47, 54, 61, 77]
• Physical attributes [16, 45, 67, 68, 72, 83]
• Design [71, 72, 81, 83]
• Acceptable and/or pleasant appearance [41, 45, 54, 63, 64, 67, 68, 82, 86, 88]
• Interactivity and proactivity [40, 41, 57, 58, 77, 84, 85],
• Robustness [44, 57, 89]
 1.5 Cost • High acquisition and maintenance cost [44, 57, 69, 72, 77, 83, 88]  
Domain 2: Outer setting
 2.1 Patient needs and resources • Unfamiliar with technology [51, 74, 88]
• Cognitive impairment [41, 48, 49, 53, 67, 74, 88]
• Independence in managing daily tasks [60, 77, 88]
• Limited usefulness of the robot [40, 41, 45, 51, 57, 65, 83, 87]
• Doubts about sustained benefits [57, 86, 88].
• Intrusiveness or privacy [45, 46, 51, 57, 83, 88]
• Negative affect [40, 47, 53, 59, 64, 65, 71, 88]
• Negative perceptions or stigma [40, 44, 51, 52, 54, 55, 62, 71, 80, 81, 88]
• Support and familiarisation [47, 57, 79, 88]
• Emotional support [41, 52, 57, 58, 60, 82,83,84,85]
• Companionship [44, 45, 60, 77, 82, 83]
• Improvement to daily life [40, 58, 63, 81]
• Entertainment [41, 45, 50, 63, 64]
• Reminiscence [41, 45, 71]
• Reminders [54, 58, 64]
• Phased introduction and training [46]
• Prolonged use [46, 47, 51, 70].
 2.2 External policy/incentives • Align care work with national care policy [75, 76]  
Domain 3: Inner Setting
 3.1 Compatibility • Institutional regulations: privacy, space and safety privacy [38, 75, 84]
• Confused/frightened residents [59]
• Background noises [41, 53, 75]
• Concern about misuse of technology [38, 75, 76]
• Lack of support from co-workers [61]
• Delineate professional boundary [38, 75, 76]
• Ethical concerns [42, 68, 71, 73]
• Hygiene [42, 44, 72, 73]
• Interfere with routine
• Physical environment [40]
• Supported work of care professionals [47, 59, 68, 76, 84]
• Integration into care routine [42, 47, 49, 75, 84]
• Positioning of social robots [51, 60, 65]
• Adaptation of physical environment [40, 41]
 3.2 Relative priority • Existing care work/processes took precedence [66, 68, 75]
• Workplace tension [68]
 
 3.3 Leadership engagement   • Leadership involvement and commitment [61]
 3.4 Available resources • Poor network connectivity [38, 39, 55, 61, 68, 70, 74,75,76, 81]
• Lack of manpower, time or training [42, 66, 68,69,70]
• Computer incompatibility [74]
• Improved network infrastructure [61]
• Time and support for care professionals [61].
 3.5 Access to knowledge and information • Access to support in rural areas [77] • Dedicated helpdesk within care facility [61]
• Individualised intervention instructions/manual [42, 43, 61]
Domain 4: Characteristics of Individuals
 4.1 Knowledge and beliefs • Initial ambivalence/negative attitudes [42, 47, 59, 66, 68, 72, 74, 81]
• Fear of damaging robot [59, 77]
• Privacy concern [38, 75, 76]
• Fear of job replacement [47, 59]
• Negative perceptions, which stemmed from technical challenges/ perceived lack of usefulness [59, 61, 74, 75]
• Evolved attitude after witnessing positive impacts on older adults/people with dementia [42, 44, 47, 49, 56, 66, 68,69,70, 72, 74, 75, 80, 81]
• Understanding that robots cannot replace their jobs [47]
• Motivation to support robot interactions [42, 61, 84]
• Alignment to organisation visions [61]
 4.2 Self-efficacy • Unequipped to program and compose activities [61] • Gain experience over time [61]
Domain 5: Implementation Process
 5.1 Planning • Assign robot with a clearly indicated role [84]  
 5.2 Engaging   • Public exposure facilitated engagement and change in perceptions [49, 59, 70]
 5.3 Key stakeholders • Negative attitudes of care professionals [69] • Care professionals’ enthusiasm [66]
• Active engagement with care professionals [84]
• Mediation of robot interactions [43, 47,48,49,50, 67]
 5.4 External change agents • Lack of sustainability [47] • Support robot interactions [40, 41, 49, 74, 76]
• Provide technical support [39, 43, 77]