Aging, Frailty
Conditions
Keywords
Health monitoring, Frailty, Home care, Home support
Brief summary
This study aims at, as a primary objective, studying acceptability of elderly about a health monitoring platform for home support and home care. The secondary objective consists in studying the correlation of different health data evolution and the frailty trajectory of the subject.
Interventions
DEVICEHealth monitors
* The connected scale (iHealth HS2) measures weight from 5 to 180kg and BMI. * The connected actimeter (iHealth AM4) monitors activity (number of steps, distance, calories), sleep (automatic sleep recognition, effective sleep time, number of awakenings) and swimming (automatic activity recognition, session duration, swim type recognition and number of laps). * The connected blood pressure monitor (iHealth Track KN-550BT)is a medical device that measures blood pressure and pulse rate. * The activity monitor (manufactured by RF Track) consists of a housing that can be positioned as a pendant or at the hip. It includes an accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer, barometer, radio transceiver, and led. The sensor records the raw signals. * The touchpad allows the subject to connect to the Calliope app. This app allows the data recovery, storage, analysis, visualization, and all the required settings for the platform to work together.
Sponsors
Rennes University Hospital
AZNetwork
RF-Track
University of Rennes
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
80 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Age ≥ 80 years old * Living at home or in senior residence * Evaluated as being robust according to the Fried's frailty test (0 met criteria) * Affiliated or beneficiary of a social protection scheme * Having given written consent
Exclusion criteria
* Hospitalization during the month preceding the first visit * Subject suffering from cognitive disorders preventing proper use of the device * Subject being unable to give by himself / herself his / her consent to participate in the trial * Person subject to legal protection (safeguard of justice, trusteeship, guardianship, persons deprived of liberty)
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Beliefs modified questionnaire | 1 month | questionnaire by Fishbein \& Ajzen (1975), is a qualitative questionnaire, with no scoring |
| UTAUT modified questionnaire | 1 month | questionnaire by Venkatesh et al. (2003) Final score is graded 1 to 10, 10 being the best score |
| Usability SUS questionnaire | 1 month | questionnaire by Brooks (1996) Final score is graded 10 to 70, 70 being the best score |
| Comfort modified questionnaire | 1 month | questionnaire by Knight \& Baber (2005) Final score is graded 11 to 77, 77 being the best score |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Motivation modified questionnaire | inclusion | questionnaire by Deci \& Ryan (1987), is a qualitative questionnaire, with no scoring |
| Beliefs modified questionnaire | inclusion | questionnaire by Fishbein \& Ajzen (1975), is a qualitative questionnaire, with no scoring |
| UTAUT modified questionnaire | inclusion | questionnaire by Venkatesh et al. (2003) Final score is graded 1 to 10, 10 being the best score |
| Comfort modified questionnaire | inclusion | questionnaire by Knight \& Baber (2005) Final score is graded 11 to 77, 77 being the best score |
| Usability SUS questionnaire | inclusion | questionnaire by Brooks (1996) Final score is graded 10 to 70, 70 being the best score |
Countries
France
Contacts
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORDominique SOMME, MD, PhD
Rennes University Hospital
Outcome results
None listed