Background: Welfare technology is a concept that appears as one of the answers to how to meet the need for care in growing older populations. Although technology has been used for decades in eldercare, it is under-problematized and there is a lack of knowledge about how effective it really is. Objectives: This paper reviews the usage of technologies in eldercare and describes determinants of successful implementation of technologies in eldercare. The review aims to summarize and critically evaluate important aspects of technology usage in eldercare. Method: A narrative review method was selected for analysis of the literature. Through applying a narrative perspective to review the literature on technologies in eldercare, a broad understanding is gained of the contextual factors and main key success factors of implementing technologies in eldercare. Result: The review yield 71 publications related to technologies in eldercare. Seven themes were identified: (1) curriculum of technologies in eldercare; (2) on technologies; (3) evaluation models; (4) key success factors; (5) perception – care personnel; (6) perception – older users; and (7) controversies and dilemmas Discussion and Implications: The result of the review shows that technologies in eldercare are promoted to enable more seamless, efficient, patient-centered and safe care, however technologies might be contributing to making eldercare more fragmented, time-consuming, technology-centered and risky. Technologies in eldercare are only as successful and suitable as organizational culture, infrastructure and management practice allow them to be.

Involving older people through co-design has become increasingly attractive as an approach to develop technologies for them. However, less attention has been paid to the internal dynamics and localized socio-material arrangements that enact this method in practice. In this paper, we show how the outcomes that can be achieved with user involvement often pertain to learning, but their content can differ significantly based on how the approach is implemented in practice. Combining explorative, qualitative findings from co-design conducted in four countries (Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden), we illustrate how different types of learning occurred as design workshops engaged the experiences and skills of older people in different ways. Our findings make visible how learning can be a core outcome of co-design activities with older adults, while raising awareness of the role of the power relations and socio-material arrangements that structure these design practices in particular ways. To benefit from the full wealth of insights that can be learned by involving older people, deeper knowledge is needed of the implicit features of design, the materials, meanings, and power aspects involved.

Background: New social alarm solutions are viewed as a promising approach to alleviate the global challenge of an aging population and a shortage of care staff. However, the uptake of social alarm systems in nursing homes has proven both complex and difficult. Current studies have recognized the benefits of involving actors such as assistant nurses in advancing these implementations, but the dynamics by which implementations are created and shaped in their daily practices and relations have received less attention.Objective: Based on domestication theory, this paper aims to identify the differences in the perspectives of assistant nurses when integrating a social alarm system into daily practices.Methods: We interviewed assistant nurses (n=23) working in nursing homes to understand their perceptions and practices during the uptake of social alarm systems.Results: During the four domestication phases, assistant nurses were facing different challenges including (1) system conceptualization; (2) spatial employment of social alarm devices; (3) treatment of unexpected issues; and (4) evaluation of inconsistent competence in technology use. Our findings elaborate on how assistant nurses have distinct goals, focus on different facets, and developed diverse coping strategies to facilitate the system domestication in different phases.Conclusions: Our findings reveal a divide among assistant nurses in terms of domesticating social alarm systems and stress the potential of learning from each other to facilitate the whole process. Further studies could focus on the role of collective practices during different domestication phases to enhance the understanding of technology implementation in the contexts of complex interactions within a group.

Recent studies prove that when implementing new technology technology-driven and one-size-fits-all approaches are problematic. This study focuses on the process of implementing personal emergency response system (PERS) at nursing homes. The aim is to understand why the implementation of PERS has not met initial expectations. Multiple methods were used in two Swedish nursing homes, including document analysis, questionnaires (n = 42), participant observation (67 h), and individual interviews (n = 12). A logic model was used to ascertain the discrepancies that emerged between expected and actual implementation, and the domestication theory was used to discuss the underlying meanings of the discrepancies. The discrepancies primarily focused on staff competence, system readiness, work routines, and implementation duration. Corresponding reasons were largely relevant to management issues regarding training, the procurement systems, individual and collective responsibilities as well as invisible work. The uptake of technology in daily practice is far more nuanced than a technology implementation plan might imply. We point out the importance of preparing for implementation, adjusting to new practices, and leaving space and time for facilitating implementation. The findings will be of use to implementers, service providers, and organizational managers to evaluate various measures in the implementation process, enabling them to perform technology implementation faster and more efficiently.