Mobile Safety Alarms Based on GPS Technology in the Care of Older Adults: Systematic Review of Evidence Based on a General Evidence Framework for Digital Health Technologies

Background GPS alarms aim to support users in independent activities. Previous systematic reviews have reported a lack of clear evidence of the effectiveness of GPS alarms for the health and welfare of users and their families and for social care provision. As GPS devices are currently being implemented in social care, it is important to investigate whether the evidence of their clinical effectiveness remains insufficient. Standardized evidence frameworks have been developed to ensure that new technologies are clinically effective and offer economic value. The frameworks for analyzing existing evidence of the clinical effectiveness of GPS devices can be used to identify the risks associated with their implementation and demonstrate key aspects of successful piloting or implementation. Objective The principal aim of this study is to provide an up-to-date systematic review of evidence based on existing studies of the effects of GPS alarms on health, welfare, and social provision in the care of older adults compared with non–GPS-based standard care. In addition, the study findings were assessed by using the evidence standards framework for digital health technologies (DHTs) established by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom. Methods This review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Primary studies published in peer-reviewed journals and gray literature from January 2005 to August 2020 were identified through searches in 13 databases and several sources of gray literature. Included studies had individuals (aged ≥50 years) who were receiving social care for older adults or for persons with dementia; used GPS devices as an intervention; were performed in Canada, the United States, European Union, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, South Korea, or Japan; and addressed quantitative outcomes related to health, welfare, and social care. The study findings were analyzed by using the NICE framework requirements for active monitoring DHTs. Results Of the screened records, 1.6% (16/986) were included. Following the standards of the NICE framework, practice evidence was identified for the tier 1 categories Relevance to current pathways in health/social care system and Acceptability with users, and minimum evidence was identified for the tier 1 category Credibility with health, social care professionals. However, several evidence categories for tiers 1 and 2 could not be assessed, and no clear evidence demonstrating effectiveness could be identified. Thus, the evidence required for using DHTs to track patient location according to the NICE framework was insufficient. Conclusions Evidence of the beneficial effects of GPS alarms on the health and welfare of older adults and social care provision remains insufficient. This review illustrated the application of the NICE framework in analyses of evidence, demonstrated successful piloting and acceptability with users of GPS devices, and identified implications for future research.

[1]  Elin Sundby Boysen,et al.  Wearable and Mobile Technology for Safe and Active Living , 2017, pHealth.

[2]  Nara L. Newcomer,et al.  User Centered Design , 2014, Encyclopedia of Database Systems.

[3]  Patrick Langdon,et al.  Does My Stigma Look Big in This? Considering Acceptability and Desirability in the Inclusive Design of Technology Products , 2007, HCI.

[4]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[5]  P. Topo,et al.  Using GPS Technologies with People with Dementia , 2019 .

[6]  M. Hernán,et al.  ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions , 2016, British Medical Journal.

[7]  Chris Todd,et al.  Implementing monitoring technologies in care homes for people with dementia: A qualitative exploration using Normalization Process Theory , 2017, International journal of nursing studies.

[8]  Antonio Miguel Cruz,et al.  What do we know about technologies for dementia-related wandering? A scoping review , 2018, Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie.

[9]  W. Carswell,et al.  A review of the role of assistive technology for people with dementia in the hours of darkness. , 2009, Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine.

[10]  Claes Wohlin,et al.  Systematic literature studies: Database searches vs. backward snowballing , 2012, Proceedings of the 2012 ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement.

[11]  Esther Brainin,et al.  eHealth Literacy: Extending the Digital Divide to the Realm of Health Information , 2012, Journal of medical Internet research.

[12]  Noam Shoval,et al.  Who should make the decision on the use of GPS for people with dementia? , 2011, Aging & mental health.

[13]  Natalie S Blencowe,et al.  RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials , 2019, BMJ.

[14]  Khine Nwe,et al.  Medical Mobile App Classification Using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Evidence Standards Framework for Digital Health Technologies: Interrater Reliability Study , 2020, Journal of medical Internet research.

[15]  A. Abu-Hanna,et al.  Effect of a Mobile Safety Alarm on Going Outside, Feeling Safe, Fear of Falling, and Quality of Life in Community‐Living Older Persons: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 2012, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[16]  B. Willemse,et al.  A pilot study on the use of tracking technology: Feasibility, acceptability, and benefits for people in early stages of dementia and their informal caregivers , 2012, Aging & mental health.

[17]  N. Knoll,et al.  User experience and clinical effectiveness with two wearable global positioning system devices in home dementia care , 2018, Alzheimer's & dementia.

[18]  M. Cowie National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. , 2015, European heart journal.

[19]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[20]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction , 1988 .

[21]  A. Sheikh,et al.  The use of global positional satellite location in dementia: a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial , 2014, BMC Psychiatry.

[22]  S. Frennert,et al.  The concept of welfare technology in Swedish municipal eldercare , 2019, Disability and rehabilitation.

[23]  C. Lampic,et al.  Effects of Tracking Technology on Daily Life of Persons With Dementia , 2015, American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias.

[24]  Claes Wohlin,et al.  Guidelines for the search strategy to update systematic literature reviews in software engineering , 2020, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[25]  J. M. G. Hipòlit,et al.  Uso de localizadores para personas mayores , 2013 .

[26]  E. Hanson,et al.  Extended safety and support systems for people with dementia living at home , 2014 .

[27]  Adam B. Cohen,et al.  Digital health: a path to validation , 2019, npj Digital Medicine.