Week 2 - LifeTec and Assistive Technology

This week saw us visiting LifeTec. They are an assistive technology consultancy company that provides free information to those requiring new AT around the home. We were exposed to hundreds of ATs that did everything from controlling computers through minute movements of the head through to moving people in and out of bed and up and down flights of stairs. 

I was amazed at the number of assistive products there are available but I was very underwhelmed at the aesthetics and affordability of each and every item. Things that I noticed were that:

• many of the products are well suited to the clinical nature of a hospital but most certainly not the home or even a nursing home
• the majority of assistive chairs, bathroom seating, bedside accessories, wheelchairs, walkers and the like were manufactured from standard white enamel tube sections with plastic of stainless steel fittings all contributing to the clinical feel
• smaller items seemed to be more aesthetically suitable to the home
• items such as tap turners and automated bottle openers appeared better considered but still lack the style and design consideration given to products for the able bodied population

Much of this has to do with funds available for this field but it highlights an enormous flaw in our medical and design industry. 

Having said this there were a number of products and systems that stood out for me during our visit.

First off is the integration of electric wheelchair controls into a computer via bluetooth and infrared connections. This kind of connection has the potential to be integrated into the home with controls to various household devices. What else could be included in this type of connection? Voice controls are available, how about gesture controls via bluetooth and infrared? How would this inform my tangible interaction input/output?

Interesting things to note about seating are issues surrounding getting out of a chair. Many have sloped backs making it more difficult to overcome gravity and to stand up. This is often overcome with bulky electric armchairs that lift the user almost to standing position. These types of chairs are often controlled by remote controls that are mounted on the sides of the chair. What can be done to reduce the number of controls necessary? Could sensors be used to interpret the users intention to stand up removing the need for a remote control?

Around the kitchen and food preparation there are a number of items that have been cleverly designed to assist the user. Items such as the silicone cooking basket that won't get hot and knives that are based on a rocking motion instead of a sawing motion. These and many more are based around great core innovative ideas but appear poorly executed in form and use. If we were to continue our research into assistive technology in this area it would be interesting to collect data on the actual user experience with each of these products. 

Walkers were again very clinical and the standard is again enamelled steel or stainless steel tubing. One innovation that did stand out was present on the Parkinson's Walker. A small device called the "U Step" that provides a laser line infront of the users feet as a visual cue to remind the user to step. Even this sort of small innovation comes at an astronomical cost making the Parkinson's walker worth around $1200!

One other design aspect that I noticed in a height adjustable shower was that the wallmounted height adjustment bar doubles as a grab rail. This presents both positive and negative results. It is a prime example of how assistive technology is coupled with existing designs to provide a product that does not draw attention to itself as a medical device. It also demonstrates how an assistive device could possibly be too hidden to be used in a split second decision. Would someone believe that it was sturdy enough to grab hold of without pulling the shower out of the wall?

We were also told that although Ipads have been incredibly popular with disability assistance there was very little support available for interaction with assistive technologies. The result of this is bulky substandard products that cost far too much. Also a product of the minimal funding provided to this industry.

______________________________________________________________________

My thoughts so far:

Although our brief requires us to stay away from products for those with severe disabilities this trip has given an insight into what needs to be considered when designing our tangible interaction.

_____________________________________________________________________

As a side note: After speaking with one of the O.T.'s from LiifeTec the sensory chair from the last post appears to be an area that has not been considered before. Maybe this has potential for my tangible interaction?