Aging Well
Conditions
Keywords
Aging well, Virtual reality, Immersive technology, Older adults, Physical activity, Cognitive activity, Social behaviour
Brief summary
The objective of this clinical trial is to understand the determinants and opportunities for acceptance of immersive technologies to support physical, cognitive, and social health and the possibilities for aging well among the new generation of older adults. The main questions it aims to answer are: * What are the needs and expectations in terms of immersive activities and intervention methods according to age? * Do different game modes influence the needs and expectations in immersive activities of this population? 50 participants will be asked to complete a preliminary questionnaire about their activity habits and preferences. They will then be invited to participate in individual or multiplayer virtual reality game trials, a post-trial discussion about their experience and a questionnaire completion.
Interventions
DEVICEVirtual reality games
three individual games (physical, cognitive and relaxation) and two multiplayer games will be tested.
Sponsors
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Canada
SEC Fonds Immobilier Groupe Maurice
Fédération Québécoise des Loisirs en Institution
Fédération de l'Age D'Or du Québec
TOPMED
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
All participants will test both multiplayer and individual games. Order of testing is reversed in between arms.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
50 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Be 50 years old or older
Exclusion criteria
* Having functional limitations * Having cognitive impairments * Being at risk of epilepsy * Not being autonomus * Having a pacemaker
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience | Immediately after each intervention (Week 1, Week 2) | 4 open questions were asked during the focus group about satisfaction with the trials. The answers were assessed through a qualitative data theme analysis. The total number of mentionned items by the intervention group is reported for two themes: appreciated items(things that the participants liked during the games), less appreciated items (things that the participants didn't like during the games). |
| Integration of Virtual Reality | Immediately after each intervention (Week 1, Week 2) | 3 open questions were asked during the focus group about intergration of virtual reality(VR) in the daily lives of the participants. The answers were assessed through a qualitative data theme analysis. The total number of mentionned items by the intervention group is reported for two themes: obstacles(factors that make the integration of VR harder in the participant's life), facilitating factors(factors that make the integration of VR easier in the participant's life), . |
| Acceptability of Immersive Technologies | Immediately after each intervention (Week 1, Week 2) | 1 open question was asked during the focus group about intention to use virtual reality(VR) in the daily lives of the participants. The answers were assessed through a qualitative data theme analysis. The total number of mentionned items by the intervention group is reported for one theme: use case of VR items(ways of using VR in the participants daily lives). |
| Change From Baseline in Interest in Immersive Activities | Baseline and immediately after each intervention (Week 1, Week 2) | Change from baseline in total score for 13 questions with 3 point scale (low, medium, high respectively scored 1,2,3). Minimum=13(low interest); Maximum=39(High interest); |
Countries
Canada
Participant flow
Recruitment details
7 candidates were screened for eligibility between April 14, 2023 and May 23, 2023.
Pre-assignment details
7 participants were randomized.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games Participants of this group will conduct the sessions in the following order : Focus group about individual virtual reality games then Focus group about multiplayer virtual reality games.
Virtual reality games: three individual games (physical, cognitive and relaxation) and two multiplayer games will be tested. | 5 |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games Participants of this group will conduct the sessions in the following order : Focus group about multiplayer virtual reality games then Focus group about individual virtual reality games.
Virtual reality games: three individual games (physical, cognitive and relaxation) and two multiplayer games will be tested. | 2 |
| Total | 7 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Customized Over 50 years old | 5 Participants | 2 Participants | 7 Participants |
| Interest in immersive activities | 30.4 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.6 | 39 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0 | 32.9 units on a scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.1 |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 5 Participants | 2 Participants | 7 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment Canada | 5 participants | 2 participants | 7 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 3 Participants | 2 Participants | 5 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 2 Participants | 0 Participants | 2 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 7 | 0 / 7 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 7 | 0 / 7 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 7 | 0 / 7 |
Outcome results
Primary
Acceptability of Immersive Technologies
1 open question was asked during the focus group about intention to use virtual reality(VR) in the daily lives of the participants. The answers were assessed through a qualitative data theme analysis. The total number of mentionned items by the intervention group is reported for one theme: use case of VR items(ways of using VR in the participants daily lives).
Time frame: Immediately after each intervention (Week 1, Week 2)
Population: All participants who received the intervention.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Acceptability of Immersive Technologies | use case of VR items, week 1 | 11 Number of mentionned items |
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Acceptability of Immersive Technologies | use case of VR items, week 2 | 5 Number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Acceptability of Immersive Technologies | use case of VR items, week 1 | 10 Number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Acceptability of Immersive Technologies | use case of VR items, week 2 | 16 Number of mentionned items |
Primary
Change From Baseline in Interest in Immersive Activities
Change from baseline in total score for 13 questions with 3 point scale (low, medium, high respectively scored 1,2,3). Minimum=13(low interest); Maximum=39(High interest);
Time frame: Baseline and immediately after each intervention (Week 1, Week 2)
Population: All participants who received the intervention.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Change From Baseline in Interest in Immersive Activities | Week 1 | 3.00 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.65 |
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Change From Baseline in Interest in Immersive Activities | Week 2 | 3.00 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.45 |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Change From Baseline in Interest in Immersive Activities | Week 1 | -1.00 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.41 |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Change From Baseline in Interest in Immersive Activities | Week 2 | 0.00 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0 |
Primary
Integration of Virtual Reality
3 open questions were asked during the focus group about intergration of virtual reality(VR) in the daily lives of the participants. The answers were assessed through a qualitative data theme analysis. The total number of mentionned items by the intervention group is reported for two themes: obstacles(factors that make the integration of VR harder in the participant's life), facilitating factors(factors that make the integration of VR easier in the participant's life), .
Time frame: Immediately after each intervention (Week 1, Week 2)
Population: All participants who received the intervention.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Integration of Virtual Reality | Obstacles, week 1 | 10 Total number of mentionned items |
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Integration of Virtual Reality | Facilitating factors, week 1 | 10 Total number of mentionned items |
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Integration of Virtual Reality | Obstacles, week 2 | 7 Total number of mentionned items |
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Integration of Virtual Reality | Facilitating factors, week 2 | 0 Total number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Integration of Virtual Reality | Facilitating factors, week 2 | 11 Total number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Integration of Virtual Reality | Obstacles, week 1 | 12 Total number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Integration of Virtual Reality | Obstacles, week 2 | 10 Total number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Integration of Virtual Reality | Facilitating factors, week 1 | 5 Total number of mentionned items |
Primary
Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience
4 open questions were asked during the focus group about satisfaction with the trials. The answers were assessed through a qualitative data theme analysis. The total number of mentionned items by the intervention group is reported for two themes: appreciated items(things that the participants liked during the games), less appreciated items (things that the participants didn't like during the games).
Time frame: Immediately after each intervention (Week 1, Week 2)
Population: All participants who received the intervention.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience | Appreciated items, week 1 | 24 Number of mentionned items |
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience | Less appreciated items, week 1 | 7 Number of mentionned items |
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience | Appreciated items, week 2 | 11 Number of mentionned items |
| Individual Then Multiplayer Games | Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience | Less appreciated items, week 2 | 0 Number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience | Less appreciated items, week 2 | 4 Number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience | Appreciated items, week 1 | 19 Number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience | Appreciated items, week 2 | 23 Number of mentionned items |
| Multiplayer Then Individual Games | Perception of Immersive Technologies Experience | Less appreciated items, week 1 | 3 Number of mentionned items |