PRE2019 4 Group5
Group members
| Name | Student number | Study |
|---|---|---|
| Danielle Paige Gillam | 1227637 | Psychology & Technology (ICT) |
| Lucia Kalkman | 1335529 | Electrical Engineering |
| Annemijn Cissy van der Lande | 1239822 | Psychology & Technology (Robotics) |
| Dajt Mullaj | 1286722 | Computer Science |
| Fabiènne Pascalle van der Weide | 1004980 | Psychology & Technology (ICT) |
Introduction
Nowadays, more and more automated technology in the vehicles industry is making its entrance in society. With the current situation of COVID-19, people are forced to live in social distancing societies [1], which results for some social groups in major challenges to continue living in a normal and healthy way. One of the major issues society is facing is maintaining the health of people who have to stay home, but still need to receive their medicines. Delivery robots could give an outcome in this situation and might give perspectives for after the COVID-19 influenced society. [2] These robots are already in use, in several situations, environments and forms. Furthermore, they are currently experimenting with these delivery robots for multiple purposes.[3]
Problem Statement
This project will explore how to implement a system of autonomous robots for the delivery of medicine and goods to the elderly and sick people. The system could then be used in hospitals to help the staff with intensive care units and for deliveries from pharmacies directly to houses or elderly homes. To sustain an efficient delivery scheme the project will develop a prototype for a multi compartment robot. Each compartment will contain medicine for a specific delivery, so that in a single trip the robot will visit multiple houses or contain all the drugs for each elder of an elderly home. The prototype will therefore be composed of two main parts, each solving a main problem of implementing delivery robots for medicines. The first part will be a software demonstrating the navigation system of a robot that needs to visit multiple houses before coming back to the pharmacy for the next delivery. The software will be written in NetLogo, a programming language and IDE for modeling agent-based environments. The second part of the prototype will consist in demonstrating the robot’s multi compartment system. To do that an app, written in Swift, will be developed and hardware representing a robot with more compartments will be assembled. The app will have an option to log in as a user or as a pharmacist/caretaker. The robot will have levers mimicking compartments opening or closing and a board to take inputs. As a user you will be able to order medicine through the app, which in turn will display a password to type on the robot’s board. When such action is performed the correct compartment containing the requested medicine will open. The project, moreover, takes into consideration that smartphones are not popular with the elderly. Therefore the latter or the caretaker assigned to an arbitrary elderly home can enter in contact with a pharmacist either by physically going to the pharmacy or by digital means, like with an email, and create a subscription for a delivery plan. They will then receive from the pharmacist a password, and on each delivery the pharmacist will furnish the robot and logging in the app will set the password for the specific compartment to the one agreed upon when the subscription was initiated. The project, as specified before, could also be used to perform deliveries within the hospital's ground in order to prevent the spread of infectious diseases among the healthcare staff.
Objectives
- Research the state of the art of the current autonomous delivery robots.
- Understand the requirements for delivery robots in the medical field.
- Design and implement a navigation system for autonomous delivery robots that finds the shortest path across multiple targets.
- Design and implement a multi compartment system that can lock each compartment by means of a password and communicates with an external application to set said passwords.
- Test both systems to understand their limitations and improve their functionalities.
State of the Art
Currently available
The types of robot forms that are currently under study and first use, can be subdivided into two areas: vehicles at the ground and in the air. The great advantage of using air-based delivery robots, like drones, is the reduced amount of interaction. However, traffic regulations are currently undefined. For the ground-based vehicles, both aspects named before are the opposite in here.
Another distinction that can be made, is the environment in which the delivery robot will perform. Currently, there are view hospitals in which robots are used to transport medicines to the patients. This is an example of inside transportation, minimizing path planning and the amount of traffic, but maximizing its demand for room recognition. [4] Also one aptheker has used delivery robots as an experiment by transporting the medicines to care-units where nurses took over the packages. The overall attitude towards this user experience was fine, but is influenced by the fact that both stakeholders had to minimally interact and were not involved in the technical liability issue. This is an example in the field of an outside environment where the robots had to face a lot of traffic and path planning, but less on room-recognition, since it delivered a package to one care unit. [5]
Furthermore, the purpose of transport can vary a lot. At the moment, drones and ground vehicles are mostly transporting goods like food and medicines, both giving an outcome for people who have transport difficulties or are not able to go outside because of their health. In Wuhan for example, the delivery robots are both already in experimenting use. [2] For food, real-time and path planning are really important. Another important aspect is its capacity of carrying a large amount of goods. It is therefore more common that riding vehicles carry these goods, whereas medicines are in smaller amounts but are more often carried by drones due to safety reasons. [6] Time plays a role in this as well, for instance: warm food needs to be delivered fast and vital donor organs need to be brought fast in war areas. [7] We can conclude that the goal of the service provided can therefore play an important role in the design choices.
Lastly, the types of technique can be distinguished, since this varies a lot per delivery robot. We will discuss this by looking at path planning, coördination & recognition, mechanics and AI in general.
- Path planning/scheduling:
Finding a feasible route of movement can be challenging for autonomous vehicles. Multiple algorithms are therefore proposed to improve its efficiency and safety on their path. These algorithms differ for robots that are returning or non-returning [8]. Also the use of GPS systems is a common tool in scheduling. Furthermore, a newer tool has been designed by making use of pedestrian flow, in which it adapts to the pedestrian potential equation based on the route estimation model [9]. When making a path planning outside, often a SLAM system is used, helping the robot to deal with the huge maps of city centers. It provides a large map of the surrounding environment [10]. This system takes the type of roads into account, traversability and provides a method for localization in dynamic environments [11]. Lastly, there are also central systems already that can map where all other robots are currently located, to generate as a pick up / order system, solving many problems in the communication between robots implementation on a larger scale [12].
- Coördination & object recognition:
A method for coordination is iGPS, this is working with ceiling cameras [13]. Another commonly used technique combination for coördination and object recognition is making use of artificial intelligence, ultrasonic sensors and cameras [14]. An example of this is the FedEx SameDay Bot — which looks like a cooler on wheels — is designed to travel on sidewalks and along roadsides to deliver small orders to homes and businesses [15]. This type of robot successfully passes objects on their way, like trash cans, skateboards etc. Moreover, another example is Amazon Scout devices; also using cameras and sensors for its planning and cöordination [16]. Furthermore, there are also robots that are capable of recognizing and distinguishing between rooms [17], making use of intelligent machine vision [18].
- Mechanics:
First of all, when looking at the ground vehicles, they have to face several problems on the road, so good mechanics are essential. At the moment, a wheel and track hybrid robot platform exists which is highly applicable to various urban environments. The developed robot platform has all advantages of track and wheel. Furthermore, this hybrid concept is highly energy-efficient because of its less-friction using wheels only on navigating flatland [19]. Moreover, new developments in the technologies of drone delivery are aircraft design, battery improvements, and control software. They could transform this industry and, consequently, society as a whole [7].
Finally, we should not forget to look at the current attitude people have towards this upcoming innovation. This is dependent on the perspective we look at. Current studies show this broadly, by making a distinction in the type of stakeholder. Random people in traffic for example will have different attitudes towards the robot than the receivers of the good [20]. Also the environmental footprint raises discussions: drones are a relatively sustainable transportation method, but the production is not. [21] However, one thing that is universal is that the delivery robot should be in balance with safety, ease of use, environment, goal and efficiency. Dependent on the welfare of the society, attitudes towards robots might differ. [20]
Limitations and issues
There are multiple problems before autonomous delivery robots can be fully used. In the following part the major issues will be stated that are currently holding back the implementation of delivery robots. One of the main problems is the attitude of society about automated vehicles. There are concerns about the safety of the transport, such things as hacking could cause problems. However, there are other concerns people have. For example whether more people will get unemployed when delivery robots are widely spread. People are also wondering whether a robot can reach every location, climbing stairs or entering a building could be difficult.[22] People also think that for example a sidewalk robot should not hinder pedestrians, which causes even more things to take care of when designing the robot. [6]
Another problem are all the technical issues. Is it possible for a robot to reach a higher efficiency, improve time and reduce cost and energy consumption. Will a robot be as reliable as a human? It should be able to deliver something within the same time and guarantee that the product arrives. [23] The biggest technical issue is the navigation and the interaction with the environment. This means the robot should always know where it is and where it’s goal is, but also what happens around him. What are possible dangers and what is the best possible way to get where it should be. Especially with a lot of individuals who don’t follow the same paths it can be difficult for a sidewalk robot to avoid them all. [9] The current technology is still struggling with this.
The final issues are the regulations. For UAV’s there are special regulations, and they are not allowed to fly everywhere, however, self-driving cars counter the same issues. They are not allowed on the road because of many ethical issues and some technical liabilities. The last option are sidewalk robots, which don’t have to meet as many regulations, but they are also difficult because pedestrians are hard to model and follow less strict paths.[24] All the different regulations in different countries and all the parts that are still very vague make it difficult to really develop delivery robots. Also questions like who is responsible for the robots mistakes make it less attractive to start working on delivery robots.[25]
Stakeholders
There are a number of different stakeholders when it comes to the field of medical delivery robots. Here the main stakeholders within the scopes of users, society and enterprise will be presented and discussed.
Users
The primary users of medical delivery robots are those who directly interact with the robot. Therefore sick or elderly people who require medicine deliveries will fall into this category. These patients will have to have sufficient understanding of how to interact with the robots and respective applications. Pharmacists and nurses will also be considered primary users as they will have to interact with the robot in order to fill it with sufficient supplies for respective patients and understand the operation of the application and robot. These users will be considered the most in the design process as they will use the robot for it's purpose, and so interface design choices as well as technical design choices will be made in order to best accommodate these users.
Society
Within society there are a number of stakeholders, the first being the Government. The Government are responsible for laws and regulations regarding the medical delivery robots, this includes traffic regulations as well as ethical laws.
The second stakeholder that is a part of the societal perspective is nurses caretakers and doctors. As well as being direct users of the robots in terms of stocking them with medicine, the medical delivery robots impact them in a less direct manner too. For example in the midst of a pandemic or an outbreak of disease, the fact that these health care workers are able to send a delivery robot to infected patients means that they reduce the risk of being infected themselves. Hospitals themselves are also stakeholders and due to the fact that hospitals are commonly hotspots for these outbreaks the reduction of infection of their staff will help prevent understaffing. The reduction of the spread of disease will additionally help society as a whole as well as reducing stress on governments.
The final societal stakeholders are people who encounter the medical delivery robots on the streets while they are performing their delivery or pick-up tasks. These individuals play an important role in the fabrication of laws and regulations as their lives will be affected by the robots without any direct gain from them. For example the possibility of disruption in pedestrian traffic or even the vandalisation of the robots will motivate respective regulations. In order to gain this stakeholder perspective a survey will be performed in order to gain insight from these stakeholders and their attitudes towards delivery robots.
Enterprise
Within the scope of Enterprise the main stakeholders are the technical companies which are developing the medical delivery robots as well as the hospitals and pharmacies with which they are partnered.
Requirement analysis
To identify current problems and requirements of the medicine delivery robot, interviews with potential users were conducted. Interviews with the primary users (elderly), as well as pharmacists, and caretakers took place (see appendix for questions). Below, the findings of these interviews can be found.
Participant 1 (caretaker)
Participant 1 works in a care and nursing home (Veenhagen) in Nootdorp. She has been working in health care for 30 years now. At the moment she works as a team manager, which means she is working with a team of caretakers and is responsible for the quality of care that they offer. She is well-informed about everything that happens and when needed also takes over some nursing tasks.
Compared to some years ago, the differences between residents are getting smaller, since a lot of people stay at home much longer than they used to. However, there are still big differences in how dependent the people are of the caretakers. There are people with dementia, who cannot really do anything for themselves anymore, but some people are in the care home for somatic reasons. This means they are physically somewhat dependent, but are mentally still really healthy. In total, there are 128 residents in Veenhagen at this moment.
Caretakers deliver medicine to all people in the care home at the moment. All people get a rating, which indicates how much control should be there regarding the medicine intake. A 1 means they get to manage their own pill boxes and are responsible for taking them in on time and a 4 means the caretaker should bring in the pills at the exact right time and has to wait until all pills are correctly taken in.
Participant 1 thinks robots could really have potential in parts of the medicine delivery. She thinks especially in home care it could really offer some solutions, since there are a lot of examples she knows in which a caretaker only delivers medicine and does not really need to help with much else. A robot costs less money and she thinks it could also be less privacy-invasive. In the care homes, she also thinks it could be beneficial, in particular for the somatic patients. It is really important that people are still cognitively well, because otherwise it could become dangerous. So she does not think it is usable for every resident.
It really important to keep the robot user-friendly, because elderly need to be able to understand it. New things are difficult for them to get used to, especially “high tech” gadgets like robots. She thinks a human-like robot might be nicer to work with for elderly than a “box-on-wheels”, but also has doubts for how long this stays interesting and if the benefits of a human-like robot outweigh the costs of implementation and functionality.
A very important thing to take into account is the monitoring aspect. Now, participant 1 and her colleagues have to check every medicine separately and really keep up to date with the 1-4 ratings of peoples independency. There needs to be a way to monitor if people take their medicine correctly and, if not, adjust their rating so that they get less responsible themselves and more dependent on the caretakers. Also, the visiting moments are really variable, so a smart way to regulating that with robots is necessary (if every separate robot visit needs to be monitored by someone, it takes less time to just deliver the medicine themselves).
Participant 2 and 3 (elderly)
Participant 2 and 3 are an elderly couple of 71 and 72 years old. They live independently in their own home and are still really active and mobile. They are both not regular medicine users, but find it really interesting to think about a delivery robot (for acquaintances that are a bit older or for themselves in case they are going to need it in a couple of years). Participant 2 has one daily pill he needs to take, but he can easily get that at the pharmacy himself.
As requirements for the robot, they thought a bit about the security of the compartments with the medication. They think that older people might forget a password too easily. They don’t see themselves as that old yet, but even they have trouble remembering passwords quite often. A simple four digit code might be easier to remember, but also easier to accidentally share with the wrong people (Participant 2 shared an example of an older lady that just told him her pin code, even though he didn’t know her).
One solution they’ve come up with, is a simple security question. The robot should be able to ask a simple (personal) question and can check the answer by speech recognition. The question can be something like “what is your oldest grandsons name?”, since people are likely to always remember that.
Another option a something like a card or chip that they can put against a sensor. This is only possible for regular clients of course, so the robot might use a combination of this sensor and a possibility to enter a password for someone that only uses the service once.
They also think a very simple and understandable app might be an option (after I suggested this), but again, maybe a combination is needed. A lot of people have a smartphone and are able to understand easy apps, but some don’t. Thus there needs to be an option for those people as well.
As an extra element to take into account, Leni suggested that the robot should deliver on certain, known timeslots. If the robot delivers on the same time every day it comes by, the users know when to expect it. This gives clarity and peace. It can get confusing for elderly if the moment of day keeps changing and it is practical to know when to expect a delivery.
Participant 4 (caretaker / elderly)
Participant 4 is a 67 year old woman that regularly visits a 90 year old woman, who needs help with a lot of daily tasks. Participant 4 takes no medicine herself and lives on her own. The older lady also still lives independently, but does need a lot of medication daily.
Participant 4 thinks a delivery service can be really useful in situations where people have poor mobility. Health care personnel delivers these medicine at the moment, but this costs them a lot of time (and thus money). As long as a robot can do the same as a human (come to the door, ring the doorbell, etc.), it can be really useful. A human deliverer doesn’t do a lot more now anyways. Especially now with COVID-19 it could really offer some solutions to the vulnerable group (not only elderly). In addition, it might be better for the environment.
On the other hand, when a human is in charge of the delivery, he/she might be able to notice some things sooner. For example, he/she gets alarmed sooner if someone suddenly doesn’t open the door (the resident could have fallen and might be in trouble). Although, a robot can also have a function that determines something might be wrong when the door is not opened after a certain amount of time.
One really important aspect is to determine the target group for this robot. People that use a service like this really should still be clear-headed and responsible enough to handle and to take their own medicine. If someone needs more help with other tasks as well, this robot won’t work or will get people in unnecessarily dangerous situations (when they get more responsibility / independency than they can handle).
As long as people belong to the group described here, a robot can be really practical and could replace a lot of human actions. Participant 4’s first reaction is that a lot of older people might not react very positively to a robot in their homes. But she quickly changes her mind and realises that all innovations need some time to adjust to them and she thinks with a robot like this, it will probably be the same. She remembers the time that medication suddenly got delivered in a so-called baxterroll instead of separate boxes and people also reacted negatively to that. But they got used to this after some time and also will with get used to a machine / robot. As long as they are capable of performing the needed actions to interact with it. Thus mentally healthy and physically able to at least open the door, for instance.
With regard to opening the components, a password/app/card are all good options. Some pharmacies also have a machine from which you can receive you medication. So with a machine that delivers your medication at home this should be possible as well. There are always pros and cons of different options (so also for the options of opening this robot). Some are cheaper, some are easier. A lot of people in participant 4’s age group she knows can handle a smart phone quite well and even older people can still to that. She thinks an app is not a lot more difficult to use than a code or card, although a card that you can scan might be a bit easier. She expects an app to cause most problems during the installation. Once it’s working, most people know how to use it (if designed properly).
Participants 4 thinks robots need some time getting used to (for elderly at least, younger people will understand it fast and can use it easily as soon as it actually exists). With regard to the looks of the robot, she thinks a drone might cause a bit more suspicion than driving/walking robots, but that is a matter of habituation as well. As long as the robots are recognizable as belonging to the pharmacy it should be fine.
Participant 5 (caretaker / COVID-19 risk group)
Participant 5 (54) visits her mother (90) 3 to 4 times a week. She mostly helps her with giving her life some structure by looking at her agenda/planning and reminding her of what day it currently is. She does some light housework like cleaning and doing the laundry or the dishes. Especially the social aspect of her visits are really important. In addition to her visits, home care comes by 4 times a day to give mom her medication and physical care and household support visits once a week. Every other week, this person picks up the medication from the pharmacy.
In the past, the medicine was delivered at home. The family, however, didn’t want this anymore. Mom has dementia and the chance is too high that she opens the door for someone who claims to deliver medicine, but is actually a burglar or some other figure that can’t be trusted. It also happened a few times that she did not open the door (because she did not recognize the doorbell), which is somewhat annoying for the person at the door.
When her mother was still clear-headed enough, a robot could have definitely been used to deliver her medication. A robot doesn’t get annoyed when the door doesn’t immediately get opened, it has more patience than people. Besides being caregiver of her mother, participant 5 herself also regularly needs medication. She would really be open to a robot delivery service. They get delivered at home now as well, a robot would not really make a difference (she doesn’t really have a personal connection with the postman now either).
Regarding the functionality of the robot, she really wants some form of legitimation / control (by scanning a card for example), since medicine are expensive and she doesn’t want her neighbour to be able to easily steal her package. Her pharmacy has a 24-hour machine for picking up medication, which uses a combination of a password (sent by email) and date of birth. She prefers a code (for every single delivery) over an app, because your phone could have died just when you need it.
Other things to take into account are that her medicine need to be cooled at all times, so the robot needs a cooled compartment. In addition, users should be mentally healthy enough to handle the responsibility and to understand the device. Also, watch out for pets (make sure people are there to receive the medication, don’t just drop them on the doormat). As for the appearance of the robot, she does not really care. Although a voice would be nice. Every action should be really easy and intuitively. People should not feel dumb when using technology.
Approach
To achieve the objectives of the project five main parts of the development process have been defined: research, requirements analysis, specification analysis, implementation and testing. To better tackle each phase regular group meetings every week have been set. During these meetings the tasks for the current development processes phase are assigned to each team member.
Group organization
Each week a different group member occupies the position of chairperson. The responsibility of the chairperson is to establish an agenda before the meeting and mediate the discussion through the topics that are set in the agenda. Furthermore the chairperson must take the minutes of every meeting during that week and act as a representative of the group during the tutor meeting. The chairperson role rotates through the members in the team.
| Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mijntje | Dajt | Danielle | Fabiènne | Lucia | Mijntje |
Development process
The first phase of the development processes of the project is the research. During the latter the literature is consulted to establish the state of the art. Moreover the problem statement is specified and the different stakeholders are analysed. A comprehensive plan is set to fix the deadlines of the other phases.
The second phase is the requirements analysis. This is a fundamental step of the development processes as the requirements will define the functionality of the project. A cost-benefit and risk assessment analysis will cover the requirements for every part of the project. The ethical evaluation will focus on the requirements for the application and the compartment system prototype, while the survey will focus on the requirements for the navigation simulation.
The third phase of the development processes is the specification analysis. During this phase the requirements are formalized using UML diagrams. The design of the user interface of the app is defined and the hypothetical maps that the delivery robots must navigate are designed in NetLogo.
The fourth phase is the implementation. The application code is written in Swift, creating an app compatible with devices supporting iOS, the hardware for the compartment system is assembled and the NetLogo program for the delivery simulation is written.
During the fifth and final phase of the development process the system is tested and a demo is finally created.
Planning
From the approach a plan for the development process was created. The plan is illustrated in the following figure using a Gantt table.
Task Division
During each development process phase the different task composing it are subdivided between the group members.
| Research | Requirements | Specification | Implementation | Testing | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Task | Group member | Task | Group member | Task | Group member | Task | Group member | Task | Group member | ||||
| Determining subject | All | Risk Assessment | ... | App Users | ... | App User | ... | Test system | ... | ||||
| Set up Wiki | Fabiènne | Cost-Benefit Analysis | ... | App enterprise | ... | App enterprise | ... | Make demo video | ... | ||||
| Approach | Dajt, Danielle | Ethical perspective | ... | Robot compartment system | ... | Robot compartment system | ... | Update Wiki | ... | ||||
| Planning | Fabiènne, Dajt | Make survey | ... | Navigation | ... | Navigation system | ... | ||||||
| Literature search | All | Analyse data survey | ... | Update Wiki | ... | Update Wiki | ... | ||||||
| Introduction | Mijntje, Fabiènne, Dajt | Update Wiki | ... | ||||||||||
| State of the Art | Lucia, Mijntje | ||||||||||||
| Stakeholder analysis | Danielle | ||||||||||||
| Update Wiki | Fabiènne, Danielle, Dajt | ||||||||||||
Milestones
By the end of week 2 the problem statement, introduction, stakeholder analysis and state of the art must be completed. This will conclude the research phase.
By the end of week 3 the survey on people’s attitudes towards our proposal and delivery robots in general, the risk assessment, and different analysis must be completed. This will conclude the requirements phase.
By the end of week 4 the analysis/conclusions of the survey and a semi-formal model of the system must be completed. This will conclude the specification phase.
By the end of week 6 the first implementation of the apps, lock system and navigation system must be completed. This will conclude the implementation phase.
By the end of week 7 the adjusted version of the apps (after testing/interviewing) and a demo video must be completed. This will conclude the testing phase.
Deliverables
The final product will be a system to distribute/deliver medicine to those in need (elderly in most cases), including:
- An application with the choice to log in as a user to order medicine and open the compartments of the delivery robot or as the pharmacist/hospital/doctor/distributor to set the passwords for the compartments and the targets the delivery robot must visit.
- A hardware system to secure and open the compartments, which can communicate with the application.
- A NetLogo program in which an agent, representing a delivery robot, finds the shortest path among multiple targets within an environment modelling the map of a city or an indoor environment, for example an ICU.
Logbook
Week 1
| Name | Total hours | Tasks |
|---|---|---|
| Danielle | 3.5 | Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5], literature research (source 5-11) [1.5] |
| Lucia | 3 | Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5], literature research (source 22-26) [1] |
| Mijntje | 2 | Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5] |
| Dajt | 3.5 | Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5], literature research (source 14-18) [1.5] |
| Fabiènne | 4 | Introduction lecture [1.5], meeting [0.5], literature research (source 1-4, 11-13) [1.5], wiki page [0.5] |
Week 2
| Name | Total hours | Tasks |
|---|---|---|
| Danielle | 5.5 | Meeting (Monday and Saturday) [2], images (Approach/Stakeholder) [1], stakeholder analysis [1.5], update wiki [0.5], tutor meeting [0.5] |
| Lucia | 8 | Meeting (Monday and Saturday) [2], state of the art [5], hardware research [0.5], tutor meeting [0.5] |
| Mijntje | ... | ... |
| Dajt | 9 | Agenda [0.5], meeting (Monday and Saturday) [2], approach [2], planning (tables) [2.5], problem statement [0.5], update wiki [1], tutor meeting [0.5] |
| Fabiènne | 8 | Meeting (Monday and Saturday) [2], literature research (source 27-30) [0.5], planning [0.5], references [1.5], update wiki [2], tutor meeting [0.5], contacting people to interview [0.5], interview questions [0.5], informed consent forms [0] |
Week 3
| Name | Total hours | Tasks |
|---|---|---|
| Danielle | ... | ... |
| Lucia | ... | ... |
| Mijntje | ... | ... |
| Dajt | ... | ... |
| Fabiènne | 5 | Preparation interviews [0.5], conducting interviews [1.5], write down/ translate/summarize interview findings [2.5], update wiki page [0.5] |
Week 4
| Name | Total hours | Tasks |
|---|---|---|
| Danielle | ... | ... |
| Lucia | ... | ... |
| Mijntje | ... | ... |
| Dajt | ... | ... |
| Fabiènne | ... | ... |
Week 5
| Name | Total hours | Tasks |
|---|---|---|
| Danielle | ... | ... |
| Lucia | ... | ... |
| Mijntje | ... | ... |
| Dajt | ... | ... |
| Fabiènne | ... | ... |
Week 6
| Name | Total hours | Tasks |
|---|---|---|
| Danielle | ... | ... |
| Lucia | ... | ... |
| Mijntje | ... | ... |
| Dajt | ... | ... |
| Fabiènne | ... | ... |
Week 7
| Name | Total hours | Tasks |
|---|---|---|
| Danielle | ... | ... |
| Lucia | ... | ... |
| Mijntje | ... | ... |
| Dajt | ... | ... |
| Fabiènne | ... | ... |
Appendices
Appendix A: Interview questions
Elderly
1. How old are you?
2. Where do you live (care home / independent)?
3. How often do you take medication?
4. How mobile are you?
5. Do you have someone to take care of you or can you still do almost everything by yourself?
6. Would you be interested in a medicine delivery service?
7. Would you be open to a robot providing this service?
8. What are things to take into account when designing such a robot? With regard to:
- Usability / understandability
- Safety/privacy
- Opened by app / password / other
- Other
Pharmacists
1. What do you feel is the main problem with distribution of prescriptions for elderly and disabled?
2. During the current COVID-19 outbreak how do people collect their prescriptions? (particularly the elderly or disabled)
3. Does the pharmacy you work at (or previously worked at) offer a medication delivery service to the customer? (answer if applicable)
4. If yes, how does this delivery service work?
5. Do you think that this kind of service is useful? If no why not and if yes, why?
6. If such a service existed using autonomous robots, would you trust such a system to safely deliver the medication?
Scenario: there are a fleet of autonomous robots with multiple (password) locking compartments inside which you, as a pharmacist, would with medication fill per each customer requirements, then lock and send on its delivery to a certain address.
7. How comfortable would you be using this technology and why?
8. What would some useful features be for this technology? for example a connected application where you can gather customer data like prescriptions addresses and passwords, or removable compartments so that you can pack them on a counter instead of leaning down to the robot
Caretakers
1. Where do you work?
2. What are your tasks/responsibilities?
3. How (in)dependent are the people (elderly) you work with?
4. How many people (elderly who take medication) are there?
5. What is the current situation regarding delivery/distribution/intake of medication?
6. Are there problems/issues/points for improvement? With regard to:
- Money
- Time
- Safety
- Other
7. Do you think automation/robots could bring possibilities?
8. What are things to take into account when designing such a robot? With regard to:
- Usability / understandability
- Trust in technology
- Duration
- Other
References
- ↑ Holstein, B. (2020). Coronavirus 101. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners : Jnp, 2020 Apr 10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2020.03.021
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Okyere, M. A., Forson, R., & Essel-Gaisey, F. (2020). Positive Externalities of an Epidemic: The Case of the Corona Virus (COVID-19) in China. Journal of Medical Virology, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.25830
- ↑ Skorup, B., & Haaland, C. (2020). How drones can help fight the coronavirus. Ssrn Electronic Journal, (2020). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3564671
- ↑ Peleato, F., Prabakar, M., & Kim, J.-H. (2013). Smart Global Positioning System for Autonomous Delivery Robots in Hospitals. 2013 29th Southern Biomedical Engineering Conference. doi: 10.1109/sbec.2013.79
- ↑ Summerfield, M. R., Seagull, F. J., Vaidya, N., & Xiao, Y. (2011). Use of pharmacy delivery robots in intensive care units. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 68(1), 77–83. doi: 10.2146/ajhp100012
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 de Groot, S. (2019).
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 Frachtenberg, E. (2019). Practical drone delivery. Computer, 52(12), 53–57.
- ↑ Bärtschi, A., Chalopin, J., Das, S., Disser, Y., Geissmann, B., Graf, D., … Mihalák, M. (2016). Collaborative Delivery with Energy-Constrained Mobile Robots LK - https://tue.on.worldcat.org/oclc/8087243524. In TA - TT -. Springer SE -.
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 N. Nishino, R. Tsugita, D. Chugo, S. Yokota, S. Muramatsu and H. Hashimoto (2016). Robot navigation according to the characteristics of pedestrian flow. IECON 2016 - 42nd Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, 5947-5952.
- ↑ K. Song et al. (2018). Navigation Control Design of a Mobile Robot by Integrating Obstacle Avoidance and LiDAR SLAM. IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), 1833-1838.
- ↑ Kummerle, R., Ruhnke, M., Steder, B., Stachniss, C., Burgard, W., & 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA 2013 Karlsruhe, DEU 2013 05 06 - 2013 05 10. (2013). A navigation system for robots operating in crowded urban environments. Proceedings - Ieee International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 3225-3232, 3225–3232. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2013.6631026
- ↑ Berbeglia, G., Cordeau Jean-François, Gribkovskaia, I., & Laporte, G. (2007). Static pickup and delivery problems: a classification scheme and survey. Top, 15(1), 1–31.
- ↑ Hada, Y., Takase, K., Gakuhari, H., & Herneldan, E. (2004). Delivery service robot using distributed acquisition, actuators and intelligence. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37566). doi: 10.1109/iros.2004.1389865
- ↑ Freehill-Maye, L. (2019). The delivery drivers. Foodservice Director, 32(12), 30–30.
- ↑ Redman, R. (2019). Walmart, target, walgreens to pilot fedex delivery robot. Supermarket News, (feb 28, 2019).
- ↑ Costelloe, K. (2019). Amazon selects irvine for scout robot delivery. Orange County Business Journal, 42(33), 4–4.
- ↑ K, L. N., Kumaran, D. N. M., G, R., Arshadh, H., I, D., & V, C. (2019). Design and fabrication of medicine delivery robots for hospitals. Ssrn Electronic Journal, (2019). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3432156
- ↑ Ranft, B., & Stiller, C. (2016). The role of machine vision for intelligent vehicles. Ieee Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2016.2551553
- ↑ J. Kim, Y. Kim, J. Kwak, D. Hong and J. An (2010). Wheel & Track hybrid robot platform for optimal navigation in an urban environment, Proceedings of SICE Annual Conference 2010, 881-884.
- ↑ 20.0 20.1 Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., & de Winter, J. C. F. (2015). Public opinion on automated driving: results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transportation Research Part F: Psychology and Behaviour, 32, 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.014
- ↑ Jarotwan, K. (2018). Analysis of environmental impacts of drone delivery on an online shopping system. Advances in Climate Change Research, 9(3), 201–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accre.2018.09.001
- ↑ Io, H. N., Lee, C. B., & 2019 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, IEEM 2019 2019 12 15 - 2019 12 18. (2019). What are the sentiments about the autonomous delivery robots. Ieee International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 50-53, 50–53. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM44572.2019.8978921
- ↑ Simmons, R., Goodwin, R., Haigh, K. Z., Koenig, S., & Sullivan, J. O. (1996). A Layered Architecture for O ce Delivery Robots.
- ↑ Marks, M. (2019). Robots in Space: Sharing Our World with Autonomous Delivery Vehicles. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3347466
- ↑ Hoffmann, T., & Prause, G. (2018). On the regulatory framework for last-mile delivery robots. Machines, 6(3), 33–33. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines6030033