[...] This priority addresses the need to raise awareness about the existing technologies and the impact they can have on improving the quality of life of older people and facilitating the provision of health and social care. It is a priority for the innovation and technology transfer agents to double their efforts in properly informing the users and educate them about the most recent technologies in the AHA sector. It includes the need for deeper knowledge on the user characteristics (e.g. age, gender) and specifications (e.g. social and cultural aspects) that can contribute for the development of better personalised interventions (e.g. changing from hospital-based models to home-centric approaches) and a more adequate design of new technologies and solutions for AHA. Also, it implies the active involvement of end-users in the definition and development phases of new solutions to ensure their appropriateness and suitability. Emphasis should be on improving the quality of care services, seeking to move from standardised health to personalised health under the motto “Less care is better care”.
I feel this whole set of priorities is starting off on the wrong foot. To me the most important thing is to work out what care pathways will best enable people to age well, in their own homes. Only when those have been agreed should we start to think about researching the best technology to support those care pathways.
Can we therefore please have a P0 of "identify the best care pathways to support ageing well then research the best technology to support them"
Charles Lowe, 28/07/2016 12:50
Dear Charles. Thank you for your comment. In fact when we mentioned the "changing from hospital-based models to home-centric approaches" it refers to start to improve the models of health care and living conditions of the elderly in their own homes by giving them the conditions and all the necessary support to they can age well at their own homes avoiding as much as possible, hospitals and nursing homes. (Amilcar – PROEIPAHA Team)
Amilcar Baptista, 30/08/2016 11:54
"Please find here some general comments instead of a line by line:
First, to ask for a deep reflection on the perversion of this dynamic of fixing wider and wider priorities in order to cover all the matters and all the interest. It’s known that opting-out is a very difficult exercise, but it’s the only one that has proved to be effective in establishing manageable action areas and prioritizing them.
Secondly, to remain that subsidiarity is a basic criterion to apply when talking about European actions. In fact, important aims, as “P1 Increase technology awareness and improve user’s e
Amilcar Baptista, 14/09/2016 19:14
Although I believe this approach is overall adequate and adjusted, I think it's missing a link. Not only users and carers need to learn and be informed about techniologies (even though there are already care organisations that have some knowledge and can be helpful here) but technical stakeholders aso need more field knowledhe (not only academic knowledge) on ageing. So, I would add, after"...informing the users and educate them about the most recent technologies in the AHA sector." that researchers and developers also need to learn about real-life needs and expectations of elderly and carers.
Carina Dantas, 19/09/2016 16:33
We talk for a while about the triple or now quadruple helix of stakeholders but we still don't connect them all in both ways - learning and teaching. Only this exhange of knowledge can upgrade the technologies that may be developed and useful to the market.
Carina Dantas, 19/09/2016 16:35
