Abstract
The sense of making good use of ICT applications in support of elderly care system seems all too obvious. However the actual adoption of such applications is very slow. It seems that good design, testing and intelligent value market analysis, are not sufficient to continue the life of many applications after the running-out of project subsidies. A Belgian multi-disciplinary team gained the hands-on-experience during two projects on this topic. This chapter describes these experiences and the lessons learned during the design, development and proof-of-concept testing phase in the field.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
COPLNTHO acronym stands for: innovative communication platforms for interactive eHomeCare.
TranseCare acronym stands for Transparant ICT platforms for eCare.
Centraal scenario van de vooruitzichten 1995–2050, Nationaal instituut voor de statistiek, Federaal Planbureau, 1996.
PAS: personal alarm service, an existing service that allows the user to activate an alarm and set up a phone communication with a central desk nurse which can dispatch help if needed.
Yogesan K, Bos L, Brett P, Gibbons MC, editors. Handbook of digital homecare, a multi-disciplinary approach towards the design and developmen ot value+ eHomeCare services. Berlin: Springer; 2009.
Cooper A. The inmates are runing the asylum. Indianapolis: SAMS; 1999.
Caroll JM. Making use: scenario-based design of human-computer interactions. Cambridge: MIT press; 2000.
John P, Tamara A. The persona lifecycle: keeping people in mind throughout product design. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann; 2006.
Hoebeke J. Adaptive ad hoc routing and its application to virtual private ad hoc networks, Ph.D., ISBN 978-90-8578-172-1, NUR 986, Ghent: Ghent University, 2007.
Arnaert A. Tele-nursing for the elderly, the case of videotelephone care, explorative study, Ph.D. Leuven: K.U.Leuven; 2001.
Hebert MA, Korabek B. Stakeholder readiness for telehomecare: implications for implementation. Telemedicine J e-Health 2004;10(1):85–92.
Dávalos ME, French MT, Burdick AE, Simmons SC. Economic evaluation of telemedicine: review of the literature and research guidelines for benefit–cost analysis. Telemed J e-Health 2009;15:933–948.
Rojas SV, Gagnon M-P. A systematic review of the key indicators for assessing telehomecare cost-effectiveness. Telemed J e-Health 2008;10:896-904.
Dansky KH, Palmer L, Shea D, Bowles KH. Cost analysis of telehomecare. Telemedi J e-Health 2001;3:225–232.
Van Ooteghem J. Multi-actor analysis for identifying the economic viability of eCare solutions, to be presented at medicine 2.0 conference, November 29–30, 2010, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Van Ooteghem J, Ackaert A, Verbrugge S, Colle D, Pickavet M, Demeester P. Economic viability of eCare solutions, to be published in the proceedings of eHealth 2010 conference, December 13–15, 2010, Casablanca, Morocco.
Onderzoek uitgevoerd door het Centrum voor Publieksonderzoek van de KU Leuven, in opdracht van het Vlaams Instituut voor Wetenschappelijk en Technologisch Aspectenonderzoek (viWTA): Kleurrijk vlaanderen kleurt grijs, eindrapport, Leuven, juli 2004.
Bijker WE. The social construction of technological systems; new directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1987.
Sleeswijk Visser F, Stappers PJ, Van der Lugt R, Sanders EB-N. Contextmapping: experiences from practice. CoDesign: Int J CoCreation Design Arts 2005;1(2):1–30.
NEXTlab project, funded by IWT (2010–2012).
Apollon, FP7 project, www-apollon-pilot.eu (2009–2011).
Telecare voor ouderen: socio-economische analyse van het gebruik van video-telefonie binnen de ouderenzorg/Peetermans Annick, Hedebouw Georges, Pacolet Jozef, Devoldere Paul, D’Haene Filip, Pouillie Roland, et al. Leuven: Hogeschool instituut voor de arbeid; 2004.
Acknowlegment
The results presented in this chapter were based on the successful collaboration of the COPLINTHO and TranseCare partners: IBBT-UGent/IBCN, IBBT-UGent/MIG-RAMIT, IBBT-V.U.B./SMIT, IBBT-K.U.Leuven/CUO, IBBT-K.U.Leuven/ICRI, IBBT-UHasselt/EDM, Wit-Gele kruis VZW, Televic N.V., Medibridge N.V., Custodix N.V., Androme N.V., AZ-St. Elizabeth, UZ Gent, In-Ham VZW., Solidariteit voor het Gezin VZW.; both projects were partially funded by IBBT and IWT.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Verhoeve, P. et al. (2011). About Motivated Project Teams, User Expectations, Proof-of-Concept Testing and the After-a-Good-Project-Hang-Over. In: Bos, L., Dumay, A., Goldschmidt, L., Verhenneman, G., Yogesan, K. (eds) Handbook of Digital Homecare. Communications in Medical and Care Compunetics, vol 3. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/8754_2011_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/8754_2011_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-19646-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-19647-8
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)