In the iZi study in The Hague, use and acceptance of commercially available technology by home-dwelling older citizens was studied, by comparing self-efficacy and perceived physical and mental... Show moreIn the iZi study in The Hague, use and acceptance of commercially available technology by home-dwelling older citizens was studied, by comparing self-efficacy and perceived physical and mental Quality of Life (QoL)-related parameters on an intervention location of 279 households and a control location of 301 households. Technology adoption was clinically significantly associated with increased perceived physical QoL, as compared with control group, depending on the number of technology interventions that were used. A higher number of adopted technologies was associated with a stronger effect on perceived QoL. We tried to establish a way to measure clinical significance by using mixed methods, combining quantitative and qualitative evaluation and feeding results and feedback of participants directly back into our intervention. In general, this research is promising, since it shows that successful and effective adoption of technology by older people is feasible with commercially available products amongst home-dwelling older citizens. We think this way of working provides a better integration of scientific methods and clinical usability but demands a lot of communication and patience of researchers, citizens, and policymakers. A change in policy on how to target people for this kind of intervention might be warranted. Show less
In the iZi study in The Hague, use and acceptance of commercially available technology by home-dwelling older citizens was studied, by comparing self-efficacy and perceived physical and mental... Show moreIn the iZi study in The Hague, use and acceptance of commercially available technology by home-dwelling older citizens was studied, by comparing self-efficacy and perceived physical and mental Quality of Life (QoL)-related parameters on an intervention location of 279 households and a control location of 301 households. Technology adoption was clinically significantly associated with increased perceived physical QoL, as compared with control group, depending on the number of technology interventions that were used. A higher number of adopted technologies was associated with a stronger effect on perceived QoL. We tried to establish a way to measure clinical significance by using mixed methods, combining quantitative and qualitative evaluation and feeding results and feedback of participants directly back into our intervention. In general, this research is promising, since it shows that successful and effective adoption of technology by older people is feasible with commercially available products amongst home-dwelling older citizens. We think this way of working provides a better integration of scientific methods and clinical usability but demands a lot of communication and patience of researchers, citizens, and policymakers. A change in policy on how to target people for this kind of intervention might be warranted. Show less
Objective Whether care group participation by general practitioners improves delivery of diabetes care is unknown. Using 'monitoring of biomedical and lifestyle target indicators as recommended by... Show moreObjective Whether care group participation by general practitioners improves delivery of diabetes care is unknown. Using 'monitoring of biomedical and lifestyle target indicators as recommended by professional guidelines' as an operationalisation for quality of care, we explored whether (1) in new practices monitoring as recommended improved a year after initial care group participation (aim 1); (2) new practices and experienced practices differed regarding monitoring (aim 2).Design Observational, real-life cohort study.Setting Primary care registry data from Eerstelijns Zorggroep Haaglanden (ELZHA) care group.Participants Aim 1: From six new practices (n=538 people with diabetes) that joined care group ELZHA in January 2014, two practices (n=211 people) were excluded because of missing baseline data; four practices (n=182 people) were included. Aim 2: From all six new practices (n=538 people), 295 individuals were included. From 145 experienced practices (n=21 465 people), 13 744 individuals were included.Exposure Care group participation includes support by staff nurses on protocolised diabetes care implementation and availability of a system providing individual monitoring information. 'Monitoring as recommended' represented minimally one annual registration of each biomedical (HbA1c, systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein) and lifestyle-related target indicator (body mass index, smoking behaviour, physical exercise).Primary outcome measures Aim 1: In new practices, odds of people being monitored as recommended in 2014 were compared with baseline (2013). Aim 2: Odds of monitoring as recommended in new and experienced practices in 2014 were compared.Results Aim 1: After 1-year care group participation, odds of being monitored as recommended increased threefold (OR 3.00, 95% CI 1.84 to 4.88, p<0.001). Aim 2: Compared with new practices, no significant differences in the odds of monitoring as recommended were found in experienced practices (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.18 to 8.37, p=0.844).Conclusions We observed a sharp increase concerning biomedical and lifestyle monitoring as recommended after 1-year care group participation, and subsequently no significant difference between new and experienced practices-indicating that providing diabetes care within a collective approach rapidly improves registration of care. Show less
