Advertisement

Health360: An Open, Modular Platform for Multimodal Data Collection and AAL Monitoring

  • Raffaele Conte
  • Alessandro TonacciEmail author
  • Francesco Sansone
  • Andrea Grande
  • Anna Paola Pala
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 544)

Abstract

Health and care features a strong need for computerised tools providing support in daily life activities, especially among elderly people. Platforms capable of safely collecting several data can represent a useful add-on to the home-care of elderly people, paving the way for a patient empowerment, improving their quality of life without needing for recurrent medical examinations at clinics. Here, we present an open, modular platform capable of collecting multimodal (anamnestic, clinical, etc.) data, gathered through different approaches, including questionnaires, medical examinations, and wearable sensors, usable by the caregiver to remotely check the health status of a patient, without needing for frequent recalls at clinics. The extensive use of this platform will allow the patient performing an automated self-monitoring, eventually with the help of a caregiver directly at home, enabling remote data sharing with General Practitioners, reducing the needs for clinics admittance, without sacrificing the quality of care.

Keywords

AAL Aging Empowerment Medical record Wearable sensors 

References

  1. 1.
    Alderete MV (2017) Examining the ICT access effect on socioeconomic development: the moderating role of ICT use and skills. Inform Technol Devel 1:1–17MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alharbi M, Straiton N, Gallagher R (2017) Harnessing the potential of wearable activity trackers for heart failure self-care. Curr Heart Fail Rep 14(1):23–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aminpour F, Sadoughi F, Ahamdi M (2014) Utilization of open source electronic health record around the world: a systematic review. J Res Med Sci 19(1):57–64Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ben Kiki O (2005) YAML Ain’t Markup Language (YAML) Version 1.2. http://www.yaml.org/spec/1.2/spec.html
  5. 5.
    Creighton C (1999) A literature review on communication between picture archiving and communication systems and radiology information systems and/or hospital information systems. J Digit Imaging 12(3):138–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cusumano M (2010) Cloud computing and SaaS as new computing platforms. Commun ACM 53(4):27–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dahlberg T, Kivijärvi H, Saarinen T (2017) Longitudinal study on the expectations of cloud computing benefits and an integrative multilevel model for understanding cloud computing performance. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii international conference on system sciences,  https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2017.514
  8. 8.
    Davis SW, Oakley-Girvan I (2017) Achieving value in mobile health applications for cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv 11(4):498–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Demiris G, Thompson H (2011) Smart homes and ambient assisted living applications: from data to knowledge-empowering or overwhelming older adults? Contribution of the IMIA smart homes and ambient assisted living working group. Yearb Med Inform 6:51–57Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    de Arriba-Pérez F, Caeiro-Rodríguez M, Santos-Gago JM (2016) Collection and Processing of data from wrist wearable devices in heterogeneous and multiple-user scenarios. Sensors (Basel) 16(9):E1538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Douzis K, Sotiriadis S, Petrakis EGM et al (2018) Modular and generic IoT management on the cloud. Fut Gener Comput Syst 78:369–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Fielding RT, Taylor RN (2002) Principled design of the modern web architecture. ACM Trans Intern Technol 2:115–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    González-Aparicio MT, Younas M, Tuya J et al (2016) A new model for testing CRUD operations in a NoSQL database. In: 30th IEEE international conference on advanced information networking and applications (AINA), pp 79–86Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haak D, Page CE, Reinartz S et al (2015) DICOM for clinical research: PACS-integrated electronic data capture in multi-center trials. J Digit Imaging 28(5):558–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hawes C, Phillips CD, Rose M et al (2003) A national survey of assisted living facilities. Gerontologist 43(6):875–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ISTAT: Anziani: le condizioni di salute in Italia e nell’Unione europea (2017). Indagine europea sulla salute (EHIS) 2015. https://www.istat.it/it/files/2017/09/Condizioni_Salute_anziani_anno_2015.pdf?title=Condizioni+di+salute+degli+anziani+-+26%2Fset%2F2017+-+Condizioni_Salute_anziani_anno_2015.pdf
  18. 18.
    Italian Ministry of Economy and Finances: 2017 Monitoring Report of Healthcare Expenditure (2017). https://welforum.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Rapporto-spesa-sanitaria.pdf
  19. 19.
    Kemp AH, Quintana DS (2013) The relationship between mental and physical health: Insights from the study of heart rate variability. Int J Psychophysiol 89:296–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim SK, Park M (2017) Effectiveness of person-centered care on people with dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Interv Aging 12:381–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McAllister M, Dunn G, Payne K et al (2012) Patient empowerment: the need to consider it as a measurable patient-reported outcome for chronic conditions. BMC Health Serv Res 12:157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Medrano R (2012) Welcome to the API economy. Forbes Online: CIO Network, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ciocentral/2012/08/29/welcome-to-the-api-economy/#190c99a83a21
  23. 23.
    Mishra SM (2015) Wearable android: android wear and google fit app development. Wiley, Hoboken, NJCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    National Academy of Engineering (US) and Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Engineering and the Health Care System (2005) Building a better delivery system: a new engineering/health care partnership. In: Reid PP, Compton WD, Grossman JH, Fanjiang G (eds) National Academies Press (US), Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Padhy RP, Patra MR, Satapathy SC (2011) RDBMS to NoSQL: reviewing some next-generation non-relational database’s internat. J Adv Eng. Sci. Technol. 11(1):15–30Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Radisic Biljak V, Ozvald I, Radeljak A et al (2012) Validation of a laboratory and hospital information system in a medical laboratory accredited according to ISO 15189. Biochem Med 22(1):86–91Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Raptopoulos A, Tsoutsouras V, Soudris D (2015) Advancing integrated and personalized healthcare services, the AEGLE approach. In: 13th IEEE international conference on embedded and ubiquitous computing (EUC) pp. 154–157Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Redis (2011) http://redis.io/
  29. 29.
    RFC 1034 IETF—Domain Names—Concepts and Facilities (1987). https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1034
  30. 30.
    Risling T, Martinez J, Young J et al (2017) Evaluating patient empowerment in association with eHealth technology: scoping review. J Med Internet Res 19(9):e329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Triberti S, Barello S (2016) The quest for engaging Am I: Patient engagement and experience design tools to promote effective assisted living. J Biomed Inform 63:150–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Welch C (2014) Apple HealthKit announced: a hub for all your iOS fitness tracking needs. http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/2/5772074/apple-healthkit-ios-8-announcement
  33. 33.
    Woznowski P, Fafoutis X, Song T et al (2015) A multi-modal sensor infrastructure for healthcare in a residential environment. In: IEEE international conference on communication workshop (ICCW), pp 271–277Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raffaele Conte
    • 1
  • Alessandro Tonacci
    • 1
    Email author
  • Francesco Sansone
    • 1
  • Andrea Grande
    • 1
  • Anna Paola Pala
    • 1
  1. 1.National Research Council of Italy, Institute of Clinical Physiology (CNR-IFC)PisaItaly

Personalised recommendations