Advertisement

A Nursing Robot for Social Interactions and Health Assessment

  • Anja RichertEmail author
  • Michael Schiffmann
  • Chunrong Yuan
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 962)

Abstract

Social Robotics for nursing care gain increasing importance in the age of demographic change and fast development of artificial intelligence. Social robots are automated or autonomous machines capable of interacting with people on the basis of social rules and are mostly humanoid and mobile. The Cologne Cobots Lab (Cologne Cobots Lab is an interdisciplinary research lab of the TH Köln – University of Applied Sciences, with its main research focus in the areas of collaborative and social robotics) is currently carrying out research in social and cognitive robotics. In the context of nursing care, approaches for capturing emotions and the state of mind of patients through different interaction analytics will be developed. We will use the humanoid robot pepper and extend its software functions so that it can take initiatives in human-machine-conversation. We conduct different user-centered experiments in real-world conditions and investigate the verbal interactions among human users and the robot system. In this regard, it would be both valuable and interesting to find out whether an AI enabled humanoid robot is able to stimulate or encourage conversation or even perform better than a natural conversation partner.

Keywords

Nursing care Human robot collaboration Social interaction Natural language analytics Health assessment Social robotics 

References

  1. 1.
    Bundesministerium für Gesundheit: Beschäftigte in der Pflege - Pflegekräfte nach SGB XI – Soziale Pflegeversicherung [online]. http://www.bmg.bund.de/themen/pflege/pflegekraefte/pflegefachkraeftemangel.html (2018). Accessed 15 Feb 2019
  2. 2.
    Wissenschaftliches Institut der AOK: Wenn der Beruf krank macht [online]. http://aokbv.de/imperia/md/aokbv/presse/pressemitteilungen/archiv/2015/wido_pm_krstd_2015-03-31.pdf (2015). Accessed 15 Feb 2018
  3. 3.
    Hülsken-Giesler, M., Daxberger, S.: Robotik in der Pflege aus pflegewissenschaftlicher Perspektive. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mitchell, P.H., Ferketich, S., Jennings, B.M.: Quality health outcomes model. Image J. Nurs. Sch. 30, 43–46 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Drach, L.M., Terner, B.: Einsamkeit im Alter - Gesundheitsrisiko und therapeutische Herausforderung. Psychotherapie im Alter 36, 441–457 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bemelmans, R., Gerlderblom, G.J., Jonker, P., de Witte, L.: Socially assistive robots in elderly care: a systematic review into effects and effectiveness. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 13(2), 114–120.e1 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Louie, W.-Y.G., McColl, D., Nejat, G.: Acceptance and attitudes toward a human-like socially assistive robot by older adults. Assistive Technol. 26(3), 140–150 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parobots, PARO Therapeutic Robot [online]. http://www.parorobots.com/ (2017). Accessed 15 Dec 2017
  9. 9.
    Robinson, H., MacDonald, B., Broadbent, E.: Physiological effects of a companion robot on blood pressure of older people in residential care facility: a pilot study. Australas. J. Ageing 34(1), 27–32 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Büro für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung beim Deutschen Bundestag (TAB): Sachstandsbericht zum TAProjekt “Mensch-Maschine-Entgrenzungen: zwischen künstlicher Intelligenz und Human Enhancement” [online]. https://www.tab-beim-bundestag.de/de/pdf/publikationen/berichte/TAB-Arbeitsbericht-ab167.pdf (2016). Accessed 15 Feb 2019
  11. 11.
    Schwenk, A., Yuan, C.: Visual perception and analysis as first steps toward human-robot chess playing. In: Bebis, G. et al. (eds.) Advances in Visual Computing, LNCS. vol. 9475, pp. 283–292, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schaal S.: Max-Planck-Institut für intelligente Systeme, Tübingen, Roboter werden selbstständig [online]. https://www.mpg.de/9269151/jahresbericht-2014-schaal.pdf (2014). Accessed 15 Feb 2019
  13. 13.
    Bedaf, S., Gelderblom, G.J., de Witte, L.: Overview and categorization of robots supporting independent living of elderly people: what activities do they support and how far have they developed. Assistive Technol. 27(2), 88–100 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krings, B.-J., Böhle, K., Decker, M., Nierling, L., Schneider, C.: ITA-Monitoring „Serviceroboter in Pflegearrangements“ [online] http://www.itas.fzk.de/deu/lit/epp/2012/krua12-pre01.pdf (2012). Accessed 15 Feb 2019
  15. 15.
    Martin, R.A.: Is laughter the best medicine? humor, laughter, and physical health. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 11(6), 216–220 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schor, J.: Emotions and health: laughter really is good medicine. Nat. Med. J. 2(1), 1–4 (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bennett, M.P., Lengacher, C.A.: Humor and laughter may influence health. I. History and background. Evid. Based complement. Altern. Med. 3(1), 61–63 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hershey, P.: On the basis of the UX process for product design. https://www.uxbooth.com/articles/ux-a-process-or-a-task/. Accessed 21 Feb 2019

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anja Richert
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michael Schiffmann
    • 1
  • Chunrong Yuan
    • 1
  1. 1.Cologne Cobots LabTH Köln - University of Applied SciencesCologneGermany

Personalised recommendations