ACM SIGCHI General Interest Announcements (Mailing List)


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Erik Grönvall <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Erik Grönvall <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:15:56 +0100
text/plain (287 lines)
sorry for cross-postings....

Workshop on Pervasive healthcare in the home : 
Supporting patient motivation and engagement
held in conjunction with the Pervasive Health 
2010 conference, Munich, Germany, 22/3 2010.

Paper Submission Deadline: 20/1 2010
Notification of Acceptance: 8/2 2010
Camera Ready Deadline: 26/2 2010
Workshop Date: 22/3 2010

For more information, please refer to the 
workshop website :
Pervasive Health 2010 -

All accepted workshop papers will be included in 
the conference proceedings and published in IEEE Xplore Digital Library.


Currently, care and rehabilitation practices 
move, to a greater extent, out of hospitals and into
private homes. This accelerating trend challenges 
healthcare systems and their patients.
Heterogeneous settings such as private homes 
together with the diverse nature of the inhabitants
and their conditions create both technical and 
usability constraints and possibilities that can inform
development of home-based care and rehabilitation 
applications. This workshop likes to investigate
and discuss challenges, requirements and 
possibilities related to home-based healthcare applications,
seen from a patient perspective. For example, how 
do we design for acceptance and engagement
among patients and their families living with 
these systems on an everyday basis? How can barriers
related to patient engagement, motivation and the 
feeling of ‘being cared for be handled by
developed systems in heterogeneous environments 
such as private homes? Or, how can User Driven
Innovation (UDI) and Participatory Design (PD) be 
used to create systems that are aesthetically and
functionally accepted by persons subject to 
homebased healthcare and rehabilitation?

This Workshop will be a one full-day workshop. We 
expect high-quality, non-previously published
work to be submitted. Accepted papers should be 
four pages long, and formatted according to the
format of the main conference, Pervasive Health 
2010. The workshop will be a mix of traditional
presentations and discussions. Position papers 
should include a statement no longer than 200
words containing a research question related to 
the submitted paper. The research questions will be
published on a discussion group on Facebook 
before the workshop to stimulate an on-
line debate. The debate will inform the 
discussion at the workshop. The objective of the workshop is
to bring together researchers, designers and 
practitioners – to present, discuss and contribute to a
framework related to the design of pervasive 
healthcare, from a patient perspective.

The workshop likes to contribute to the design of 
pervasive healthcare applications and systems for
the home. The focus will be on studies and 
applications that discuss a home care environment and
outcome of such work, addressing individually or 
in combination socio-technical aspects of
healthcare in the home, technological aspects of 
healthcare in the home, and methodological
challenges of how methods such as UDI and PD can 
be used to develop tools and applications that
embrace the challenges related to motivation and 
engagement. Both theoretical investigations and
work based on empirical efforts are welcome. 
Examples of successful and less successful projects
alike are invited creating a framework related to 
the design of successful applications for self-
managed care in private homes.

All accepted workshop papers will be included in 
the conference proceedings and published in IEEE Xplore Digital Library.

Topics addressed in the workshop include, but are not limited to:

*  Challenges with and new methods of UDI/PD in home-based healthcare
*  Mismatch professional/patient understanding
*  Responsibility for own treatment
*  Aesthetics in the home and functionality
*  Adapting solutions to each home and patient (physically and digital)
*  Close family, Relatives, Community and their roles
*  Integration of treatment in the daily life
*  Home/hospital collaboration
*  Patient vs citizen (patient role)
*  Mobility
*  Collaboration

Workshop chairs
Erik Grönvall*
  - [log in to unmask]
Rikke Aarhus*
  - [log in to unmask]
Simon B Larsen**
  - [log in to unmask]

*Department of Computer Science, Aarhus 
University, Aabogade 34, 8200 Aarhus, Denmark
**Alexandra Institute, Aabogade 34, 8200 Aarhus, Denmark

International program committee
Liam Bannon, University of Limerick, Ireland
Geraldine Fitzpatrick, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Leonardo Giusti, Fondazione Bruno Kessler, Italy
Stefan Lundberg, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden
Cristiano Storni, University of Limerick, Ireland

Current trends within the healthcare sector are 
that patients spend less time at the hospital, that
healthcare expertise and treatment are 
centralized at bigger hospitals and that there is a growth in
number of chronic diseases. These factors create 
the foundation for increased self-care, home-care
and a shift from a passive to an active patient 
role. Assistive healthcare technologies for the home,
trying to support this development need to 
consider, at a minimum, requirements related to (i) the
patient’s home, (ii) the technology and (iii) the 
healthcare sector. This workshop likes to explore how
motivation and patient engagement in a home-based 
treatment programme can be supported,
developing systems that take these three topics into consideration.

The patient and the home

Even if studies have shown that patients in some 
cases experience a higher sensation of ‘quality of
life’ during home treatment in respect to 
hospitalization [1], known barriers exist. It is challenging to
transfer a hospital-based treatment directly into 
a home-setting, due to the diverse properties of the
settings. Indeed, the home as such is not 
designed as a place for care, and people often prefer to
keep their sickness invisible in their homes [2]. 
The role of the patient shifts while in the home or at
the hospital. At the hospital, the patient only 
has to care about being ‘a patient’, while at home, ‘the
patient’ shall also be e.g. the husband/wife, the 
worker, the sportsman, the neighbour [3].
Consequently, patient motivation and engagement 
decisively influence the success of home based
treatment schemes. In particularly within 
rehabilitation research, these concepts have been
thoroughly elaborated (see e.g. [4, 5]). 
Furthermore, in rehabilitation, home based programs appear
to have better adherence rates than centre based 
programs [6]. However, within ‘traditional’
treatment schemes, these concepts are less 
developed theoretically, and reports are more likely to
concern the practitioner-centric ‘compliance’, 
claiming for instance, that compliance problems occur
more often in home-based care than in a 
controlled hospital environment where for example a nurse
both issues and supervises the intake of a 
medicine [7]. Regardless of the terms chosen, compliance
or motivational issues derive from many reasons, 
often of complex human nature [8]. routines to
support this exists, [9] presents a study that 
exemplifies how elderly creatively develop tools and
routines to make medicine intake fit into their 
everyday lives. To develop diverse healthcare systems
for the homes, we must understand these and other 
requirements, seen from the patient’s


In pervasive health scenarios focusing on the 
home, technology is often used as leverage for
implementing new home based treatment schemes. 
Thus, new technologies are introduced in the
same process that moves the treatment scheme to 
the home. However, technology in itself poses
challenges to the success of home based 
treatment. While some technologies are commonly
acknowledged as ‘empowering’ for the patients 
[10], especially elderly patients may also experience
alienation on account of the technology [11]. A 
different approach than attaching new technologies
to the treatment is to make efforts towards 
integrating the solution into existing technologies and
infrastructures. This approach has been shown 
able to sustain the aesthetic environment in the home
[12], improve the patient’s mobility and help 
de-stigmatize or ‘put the condition in the background –
for instance by allowing the patient to consult 
medical records by use of daily remedies such as the
mobile phone [13]. However, regardless of 
strategy, the technology applied (e.g. applications,
interfaces and the infrastructure) must answer to 
a list of both hard and soft requirements existing in
a private home. The challenge is to introduce 
technological healthcare systems in the home that not
only fulfil requirements from a medical protocol 
but that also answers to the wider range of
requirements existing in private homes, emerging 
from the setting and its inhabitants.

Healthcare sector

As a tool to provide healthcare, assistive 
technologies that will aid in out-patients’ everyday care
should respond to health protocols and be able to 
provide meaningful support. What is the role of
for example the doctor, physiotherapist or 
home-visiting nurse in the setup, configuration,
administration and monitoring of e.g. use, alarm 
situations, collected data and logs?

1. Coley, C., Li, Y., Medsger, A., Marrie, T., 
Fine, M., Kapoor, W., Lave, J., Detsky, A., Weinstein,
M., and Singer, D., Preferences for home vs 
hospital care among low-risk patients with community-
acquired pneumonia. Archives of Internal Medicine, 1996. 156(14): p. 1565.
2. Ballegaard, S., Hansen, T., and Kyng, M., 
Healthcare in everyday life: designing healthcare
services for daily life. 2008.
3. Alonzo, A., Everyday illness behavior: a 
situational approach to health status deviations. Social
science & medicine, 1979. 13(4): p. 397.
4. Maclean, N., Pound, P., Wolfe, C., and Rudd, 
A., The Concept of Patient Motivation A
Qualitative Analysis of Stroke Professionals' 
Attitudes. 2002, Am Heart Assoc. p. 444-448.
5. Geelen, R. and Soons, P., Rehabilitation: 
an'everyday'motivation model. Patient education and
counseling, 1996. 28(1): p. 69.
6. Ashworth, N., Chad, K., Harrison, E., Reeder, 
B., and Marshall, S., Home versus center based
physical activity programs in older adults. 
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online),
7. Vivian, B. and Wilcox, J., Compliance 
communication in home health care: A mutually reciprocal
process. Qualitative Health Research, 2000. 10(1): p. 103.
8. Eraker, S., Kirscht, J., and Becker, M., 
Understanding and improving patient compliance. Annals
of Internal Medicine, 1984. 100(2): p. 258.
9. Palen, L. and Aaløkke, S. Of pill boxes and 
piano benches: home-made methods for managing
medication. 2006: ACM.
10. Mynatt, E., Rowan, J., Craighill, S., and 
Jacobs, A. Digital family portraits: supporting peace of
mind for extended family members. 2001: ACM New York, NY, USA.
11. Johannsen, N. and Kensing, F. Empowerment reconsidered. 2005: ACM.
12. Ballegaard, S., Bunde-Pedersen, J., and 
Bardram, J. Where to, Roberta?: reflecting on the role
of technology in assisted living. 2006: ACM.
13. Aarhus, R., Ballegaard, S., and Riisgaard, 
T., The eDiary: Bridging home and hospital through
healthcare technology.

Erik Grönvall, Ph.D.
Department of Computer Science
University of Århus
IT-parken, Åbogade 34
DK-8200 Århus N, Denmark

phone: 0045 8942 5635
cell:  0045 4242 8891
fax:   0045 8942 5601 

                To unsubscribe, send an empty email to
     mailto:[log in to unmask]
    For further details of CHI lists see