Quality of Hospital Entrance Reception, Social Robots
Conditions
Keywords
Older people
Brief summary
The HOSPER project aims to determine if using Pepper and NAO social robots at the IRCCS INRCA in Ancona's (Italy) entrance is a viable way to improve the current reception and guidance services for hospital visitors. The robots will offer proactive assistance and directions to departments.
Detailed description
The primary aim of the HOSPER project is to assess the feasibility of an innovative reception and proactive guidance service designed to enhance the quality of the existing service provided by the IRCCS INRCA in Ancona (Italy). This will be achieved through the deployment of two social robots, Pepper and NAO, located at the hospital entrance to provide information to users inquiring about directions to specific departments. Furthermore, the study will evaluate the level of participant satisfaction with their interactions with the robots.
Interventions
OTHERInnovative hospital reception service with social robot NAO
The robot NAO welcomes the user and asks how it can assist them. At this point, the user responds, and the robot, in turn, replies in two possible ways: If it has not understood the request, it prompts the user to rephrase it, and the process returns to the previous point. If it has understood the request, it explains the route the user needs to follow. Once the interaction has been successful or two consecutive attempts have failed, the robot asks the user if the necessary information has been provided. If yes, the robot dismisses the user. If no, the interaction resumes from the point where the robot asks for the department to reach or the exam to take.
OTHERInnovative hospital reception service with social robot PEPPER
The robot PEPPER welcomes the user and asks how it can assist them, stating the following phrase: Good morning and welcome to INRCA. I am PEPPER and I am here to provide directions to help you reach your desired location within the hospital. Which department do you need to reach or which exam do you need to take? At this point, the user responds, and the robot, in turn, replies in two possible ways: If it has not understood the request, it prompts the user to rephrase it, and the process returns to the previous point. If it has understood the request, it explains the route the user needs to follow. Once the interaction has been successful or two consecutive attempts have failed, the robot asks the user if the necessary information has been provided. If yes, the robot dismisses the user as follows: Thank you for your participation. Have a good day. If no, the interaction resumes from the point where the robot asks for the department to reach or the exam to take.
Sponsors
Istituto Nazionale di Ricovero e Cura per Anziani
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
65 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Possession of full cognitive capacity;
Exclusion criteria
* • Lack of written informed consent
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| perceived quality of the innovative reception service | immediately after the intervention | The perceived quality will be evaluated by an ad hoc Customer Satisfaction questionnaire. The definition of this indicator is evaluated by quantifying several variables, including: the attention received from the robot in terms of accuracy of the interaction and courtesy (score from 1 - not at all satisfied - to 7 - very satisfied), the clarity and completeness of the information received (score from 1 - not at all satisfied - to 7 - very satisfied), the respect for personal privacy (score from 1 - not at all satisfied - to 7 - very satisfied), the overall satisfaction with the service provided (score from 1 - not at all satisfied - to 7 - very satisfied), and whether the service would be recommended to others (score from 1 - absolutely not - to 7 - definitely yes). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Usability | immediately after the intervention | The usability will be evaluated by the System Usability Scale (SUS). It consists of a 10-item questionnaire with five response options for respondents, ranging from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. The score for the System Usability Scale (SUS) is calculated by following these steps: * For odd-numbered questions (1, 3, 5, 7, 9), subtract 1 from the user's rating. * For even-numbered questions (2, 4, 6, 8, 10), subtract the user's rating from 5. * Add the new values for all 10 questions. * Multiply this sum by 2.5. This final number gives you a score out of 100. The System Usability Scale (SUS) score, ranging from 0 to 100, is interpreted to indicate the perceived usability of a system. Higher scores suggest better usability. Interpreting SUS Scores: 90-100: exceptionally good usability. 80-89: very good usability 70-79: good usability 60-69: the usability is marginal 50-59: Poor usability 0-49: Extremely poor usability |
Countries
Italy
Contacts
Primary ContactAnna Rita Bonfigli
Outcome results
None listed