IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i20p8770-d1496168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Positive Strategies for Enhancing Elderly Interaction Experience in Smart Healthcare through Optimized Design Methods: An INPD-Based Research Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Jiacheng Luo

    (Department of Smart Experience Design, Graduate School of Techno Design, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Republic of Korea)

  • Ru Zhang

    (Department of Smart Experience Design, Graduate School of Techno Design, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Republic of Korea)

  • Junping Xu

    (Department of Smart Experience Design, Graduate School of Techno Design, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Republic of Korea)

  • Younghwan Pan

    (Department of Smart Experience Design, Graduate School of Techno Design, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Republic of Korea)

Abstract

The breakthrough in artificial intelligence technology and the development of smart healthcare models have significantly improved modern healthcare services. However, the elderly population still faces numerous challenges. Therefore, the aim of this study is to enhance the interactive experience of elderly users and to propose effective design strategies through optimized design methods. Based on the INPD research methodology, the design process is divided into four stages. First, in the SET phase, product opportunity gaps are identified, followed by in-depth interviews and surveys to gather user needs. Second, the AHP method is used to establish a hierarchical model and judgment matrix to determine the subjective weights of each need, while the EWM method, based on survey data, determines the objective weights of each need. To ensure the scientific nature of the overall weight, a combined weighting approach is used, followed by a final prioritization of needs. Third, after translating user needs into design requirements, three design schemes are produced, and the TOPSIS method is used to calculate the weights and evaluate the optimal scheme. Fourth, the product opportunities are implemented and tested. The research results indicate that the proposed optimization design method is effective and not only reduces the barriers and challenges elderly users face when interacting with intelligent products but also enhances their overall experience. Moreover, it provides a practical approach to the sustainable development of smart healthcare. As an essential component of future healthcare services, the sustainability of smart healthcare will depend on a deep understanding of user needs and continuous optimization. The design strategy proposed in this study offers practical application value, improving elderly users’ satisfaction while also providing insights that may be useful for other smart services.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiacheng Luo & Ru Zhang & Junping Xu & Younghwan Pan, 2024. "Positive Strategies for Enhancing Elderly Interaction Experience in Smart Healthcare through Optimized Design Methods: An INPD-Based Research Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-31, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:20:p:8770-:d:1496168
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/20/8770/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/20/8770/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ke Chen & Alan Hoi-shou Chan, 2013. "Use or Non-Use of Gerontechnology—A Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Saaty, T. L. & Vargas, L. G., 1979. "Estimating technological coefficients by the analytic hierarchy process," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 333-336.
    3. Vera Gallistl & Rebekka Rohner & Alexander Seifert & Anna Wanka, 2020. "Configuring the Older Non-User: Between Research, Policy and Practice of Digital Exclusion," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 233-243.
    4. Vargas, Luis G., 1990. "An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 2-8, September.
    5. Ittay Mannheim & Ella Schwartz & Wanyu Xi & Sandra C. Buttigieg & Mary McDonnell-Naughton & Eveline J. M. Wouters & Yvonne van Zaalen, 2019. "Inclusion of Older Adults in the Research and Design of Digital Technology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-17, October.
    6. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    2. Lucas, Rochelle Irene & Promentilla, Michael Angelo & Ubando, Aristotle & Tan, Raymond Girard & Aviso, Kathleen & Yu, Krista Danielle, 2017. "An AHP-based evaluation method for teacher training workshop on information and communication technology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 93-100.
    3. Siraj, Sajid & Mikhailov, Ludmil & Keane, John A., 2015. "Contribution of individual judgments toward inconsistency in pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 557-567.
    4. Zsuzsanna Katalin Szabo & Zsombor Szádoczki & Sándor Bozóki & Gabriela C. Stănciulescu & Dalma Szabo, 2021. "An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach for Prioritisation of Strategic Objectives of Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    5. Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi & Dai, Min, 2008. "A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 229-242, April.
    6. Tohid Atashbar, 2013. "Iranian Disease: Why a Developing Country's Government Did Not Listen to Economists' Advices," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 732-760, July.
    7. Alessio Ishizaka & Enrique Mu, 2023. "What is so special about the analytic hierarchy and network process?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 625-634, July.
    8. Shapiro, Arnold F. & Koissi, Marie-Claire, 2017. "Fuzzy logic modifications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 189-202.
    9. A Ishizaka & D Balkenborg & T Kaplan, 2011. "Influence of aggregation and measurement scale on ranking a compromise alternative in AHP," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 700-710, April.
    10. Bakhtiar Feizizadeh & Thomas Blaschke, 2013. "GIS-multicriteria decision analysis for landslide susceptibility mapping: comparing three methods for the Urmia lake basin, Iran," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 65(3), pages 2105-2128, February.
    11. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.
    12. A Ishizaka & D Balkenborg & T Kaplan, 2011. "Does AHP help us make a choice? An experimental evaluation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(10), pages 1801-1812, October.
    13. Schneider, Frank, 2008. "Multiple criteria decision making in application layer networks," Bayreuth Reports on Information Systems Management 36, University of Bayreuth, Chair of Information Systems Management.
    14. Ana Tur-Porcar & Norat Roig-Tierno & Anna Llorca Mestre, 2018. "Factors Affecting Entrepreneurship and Business Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-12, February.
    15. Bahram ABEDINIANGERABI & Somaye FATHI & Hossein JONOSH FARAHANI & Shirin KAMALIRAD & Narges SADEGHI GOLSHAN, 2014. "The MCDM Application in Urban Planning Projects. The CDS project of district 22 of Tehran Municipality," Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(3), pages 55-69, August.
    16. Vatankhah, Sanaz & Bamshad, Vahideh & Altinay, Levent & De Vita, Glauco, 2023. "Understanding business model development through the lens of complexity theory: Enablers and barriers," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 155(PA).
    17. Chun-Wei Chen, 2024. "Utilizing a Hybrid Approach to Identify the Importance of Factors That Influence Consumer Decision-Making Behavior in Purchasing Sustainable Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-39, May.
    18. Peng Sun & Jiawei Yang & Yongfeng Zhi, 2019. "Multi-attribute decision-making method based on Taylor expansion," International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, , vol. 15(3), pages 15501477198, March.
    19. Ferenc Bognár & Petra Benedek, 2022. "A Novel AHP-PRISM Risk Assessment Method—An Empirical Case Study in a Nuclear Power Plant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-15, September.
    20. Ágoston, Kolos Csaba & Csató, László, 2024. "A lexicographically optimal completion for pairwise comparison matrices with missing entries," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 314(3), pages 1078-1086.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:20:p:8770-:d:1496168. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.