Authors:
Jon Sørgaard
1
;
Mihai Berteanu
2
and
J. Artur Serrano
3
Affiliations:
1
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
;
2
University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila, Romania
;
3
Norwegian University of Science and Technology and University Hospital of North, Norway
Keyword(s):
Dementia, Sociotechnical Network, Sensory Stimulation, SENSE-GARDEN, Immersive Technology, Personalization, Active and Assisted Living, Welfare Technology, Assistive Technology, Emotion Quantification, Actor Network Theory.
Abstract:
Dementia is a degenerative disease affecting the cognitive abilities in a serious way among the persons living with it. Through different kinds of sensory stimulation, one may slow down the deterioration processes among persons with dementia. The use of personal photographs, storytelling and familiar question-and-answers in an informal setting and with informal caregivers may be very valuable. Several national health services around the world have established sensory stimulation gardens (sense-gardens), as well as sensory stimulation rooms (Snoezelen rooms). In the SENSE-GARDEN room, we build on these concepts to develop and implement immersive technologies that create multisensory stimulation – sound, sights, smells, movements. We propose technology-based tools that link the stimulation experience directly to the personal history of persons with dementia to help them reconnect with their past and present. The professional participants in the project come from different fields and ha
ve different expectations and views on the various aspects of the project. This may have affect on elements such as goals, strategies, and tasks. In this paper, we sum up our work to build a common understanding and definition of these elements. By using a qualitative approach, we have mapped the different perspectives among representatives of the professional groups involved in the SENSE-GARDEN room. The methods used for mapping and analysing these differences are described. We have discovered some a priori differences that mainly seem to be related to the professional groups. To some extent, this may be due to each group’s tasks and responsibilities within the project, but most likely also to different professional cultures. However, through the process we have found a strong commitment to define a common ground from where the project can progress. The differences we are left with are complementary, not contradictory, and will be valuable as they allow to shape synergies within the development of various aspects of the project.
(More)