PRE2016 4 Groep2

Preliminary planning

Week 1 (24 april-30 april) Definitie Problem definition Context Planning ME Presentation JF Research about state of the art Make appointment with secondary users Brainstorm: what to put in interview/questionnaire? 27/4 deadline planning 24/4 meeting 1 25/4 meeting 2

Week 2 (1-7 mei) Concepts 1/5 First presentation (max. 10 min) Research Split the problem in 3-5 parts (ideas: CCVSD, Computervision (locating (body parts of) person), outward appearance robot, optimal body lifting, extra functions) Decide upon different subjects, who will do what part? Prepare interview/questionnaire with nurses in home care Conduct interview with team of nurses

Week 3 (8-14 mei) Implementation Individual work on different sections Process results of interview/questionnaire Check each others work regularly Meeting for feedback, more tasks, …

Week 4 (15-21 mei) Implementation Individual work Based on results questionnaire: decide upon new features of robot, what values are important for patient and nurse that we should take into account? Meeting for feedback, more tasks, … Preliminary design of robot

Week 5 (22-28 mei) Results Extra week for individual work What are the results? Improve preliminary design

Week 6 (29 mei-4 juni) Results Decide upon final design, give descriptions and make diagrams Bring all the components together

Week 7 (5-11 juni) Results, in hindsight Extra week for final design Discussion Conclusion What else to do (or could have been done)

Week 8 (12 juni) Final presentation

Task, Who+deadline, Duration, Finished? Planning, ME 27/4, 1:00 Presentation, JF 30/4, 2:00 Research, decide which subject to discuss; All 1/5; 6:00

Week 1 meeting 1

24/4

Discussed: Ellen and Mireille looking for what is needed in healthcare, asking nurses, looking in the feeld where the problems occur with caring for people and people caring for themselves. Everyone will look what is state of the art about lifting people autonomously, what can we improve about this technology and what will be the future challenges Next meeting: 25/4 12:30 Fixed meetings: every monday 9:00-12:30

25/4

what subject do we want to choose concretely? The “robear” is very similar to what we had in vision, it can lift up people. This robear doesn’t have robot vision yet, so we can see if we can improve this aspect so that we can lift up a person in every position. Is this not a too small concept? what can our end goal be? making an autonomous robot which can lift people what do we need to accomplish? who are the users? first, secondary users knowing what is state of the art, what do people think of the current lift possibilities how does it need to look like design a concept knot cutting we take the robear as state of the art, we want to create a lifting robot that can operate autonomously without supervision, which has an appearance which people appreciate points to do: specify how the robear exactly operates what are the points to improve, what is missing doing field research with the secondary users (week 2) doing field research about our final concept designing the appearance simulating the navigation value sensitive design computer vision ...

with every point we: search the state of the art we identify what is missing or can be improved we design a better solution

combining every component to create our final robot on paper

Tasks: Joris and Frouke will make the presentation and will presentate on monday Ellen and Mireille will make the planning specific and in detail

Preparations for interview and identifying values (preliminary work, Ellen)

Interview Identify the context, user and tasks of the robot What are important values for the care givers? What are important values for the care receivers? Can there be linked concrete norms to these values?

Work done beforehand:

Care robot: Care for persons “Designed for use in home, hospital, or other settings to assist in, support, or provide care for the sick, disabled, young, elderly or otherwise vulnerable persons” (Vallor 2011) Tasks Assisting in caregiving tasks Monitoring a patient’s health status Providing social care or companionships Some level of autonomy Require minimal human input, but are still human-operated “interpretive flexibility”: a robot is defined by its context, users and task for use Three dimensions to ethics of robots: Ethical systems built in robots Ethical systems of people who design robots Ethics of how people treat robots Care (4 stages, Tronto) Caring about (recognizing one is in need and what those needs are) Care taking (taking responsibility for the meeting of said needs) Care giving (fulfilling an action to meet the needs of an individual) Care receiving (recognition of a change in function of the individual in need) Moral elements (corresponding) attentiveness responsibility competence responsiveness Needs of care receiver ← → Needs of care giver

Context Nursing home (e.g. critical care ward for people with dementia) Values Safety (of the care receiver and care giver) care receiver: prevent injury from falling, being squished, choking, being trapped, … care giver: prevent injury from being run over, being trapped, catching care receiver, … Trust Touch Hands-on care, warm and seemingly “safe” hands/arms Linked values: Respect Intimacy Human dignity Patient satisfaction Nurse satisfaction Physical wellbeing patient Psychological wellbeing patient Compassion Empathy Patient-nurse relationship Competence

What to check with the nurses:

What questions we will ask:

Sources: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662860/, Designing Robots for Care: Care Centered Value-Sensitive Design, Aimee van Wynsberghe