Imagine a social alarm as a safety net for older adults with dementia living at home. However, research on the actual use of social alarms has been limited. In a recent study, the experiences and access to social alarms among home-bound people with dementia and their caregivers were examined. The study involved 278 dyads, with 82 participants reaching the final assessment at 24 months. It was found that 62.2% of the subjects had access to a social alarm, but approximately 50% of the patients were not even aware of having one. Interestingly, caregivers perceived the social alarm differently from the patients, with some feeling a false sense of security while others viewed it as having no value. Furthermore, although the number of installed social alarms increased over time, there was also an increase in unused alarms and a decrease in patients feeling safe. These findings suggest that there is a gap between access to and use of social alarms, indicating a need for better provision and follow-up by municipalities. In order to adapt to changing needs and declining cognitive abilities, passive monitoring may offer a solution to enhance safety.

BackgroundSocial alarms are considered an appropriate technology to ensure the safety and independence of older adults, but limited research has been conducted on their actual use. We, therefore, explored the access, experiences, and use of social alarms among home-bound people with dementia and their informal caregivers (dyads).MethodsFrom May 2019 to October 2021, the LIVE@Home.Path mixed-method intervention trial collected data from semi-quantitative questionnaires and qualitative interviews conducted among home-dwelling people with dementia and their informal caregivers in Norway. The study focused on data from the final assessment at 24 months.ResultsA total of 278 dyads were included, and 82 participants reached the final assessment. The mean age of the patients was 83 years; 74.6% were female; 50% lived alone; and 58% had their child as a caregiver. A total of 62.2% of subjects had access to a social alarm. Caregivers were more likely to answer that the device was not in use (23.6%) compared to patients (14%). Qualitative data revealed that approximately 50% of the patients were not aware of having such an alarm. Regression analyses assessed that access to a social alarm was associated with increasing age (86–97 years, p = 0.005) and living alone (p < 0.001). Compared to their caregivers, people with dementia were more likely to answer that the device gave them a false sense of security (28% vs. 9.9%), while caregivers were more likely to answer that the social alarm was of no value (31.4% vs.14.0%). The number of social alarms installed increased from 39.5% at baseline to 68% at 24 months. The frequency of unused social alarms increased from 12 months (17.7%) to 24 months (23.5%), and patients were less likely to feel safe during this period (60.8% vs. 70%).ConclusionDepending on their living situation, patients and family members experienced the installed social alarm differently. There is a gap between access to and the use of social alarms. The results indicate an urgent need for better routines in municipalities with regard to the provision and follow-up of existing social alarms. To meet the users’ changing needs and abilities, passive monitoring may help them adapt to declining cognitive abilities and increase their safety.Clinical Trial Registration: https://ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04043364.

Read Full Article (External Site)