Related Experiment Videos
Artificial intelligence enabled social robotic interventions (PARO) in Australian dementia care: A systematic review
Syed Haris Omar1, Ahsan Ghani2, Adla Sanober3
1School of Dentistry and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Science and Health, Charles Sturt University, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia.
Background:
Although there is a growing body of research indicating that Personal Robot/Social Robot could be used in various aspects of care for individuals with dementia, little is known about how well these types of interventions work in an actual hospital setting in Australia.
Aims & Objectives:
The objective of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effectiveness of PARO-based socially assistive robotic intervention in terms of its effectiveness outcomes towards the reduction of dementia-related behavioural and psychological symptoms in Australian based healthcare settings.
Methods:
A systematic search was conducted across five electronic databases, including MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library, to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating PARO-based socially assistive robotic interventions for dementia in Australian healthcare settings. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251251916) and followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. In addition, the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2) was used to evaluate the risk of bias across all studies. Pooled standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for agitation, anxiety, and depression. Heterogeneity across studies was evaluated using the I2 statistic.
Results:
Six RCTs involving 1444 participants were identified for inclusion in this review. AI-enabled socially assistive robotic interventions, specifically the PARO therapeutic robot, significantly reduced agitation and anxiety when compared to standard treatment or control conditions. The pooled analysis showed that agitation [SMD = -0.44 (95 % CI: -0.70, -0.18) p = 0.0008] and anxiety [SMD = -0.59 (95 % CI: -0.91, -0.27) p = 0.0003] were reduced significantly, while the decrease in depression [SMD = -0.44 (95 % CI: -0.95, -0.07) p = 0.09] scores was non-significant among dementia patients receiving PARO-based socially assistive robotic interventions as compared to the control. The overall risk of bias across all six studies was considered low to moderate.
Conclusion:
PARO-based socially assistive robotic interventions may provide preliminary evidence of effectiveness in reducing agitation and anxiety in individuals with dementia in Australian healthcare, but the evidence regarding the reduction of depression remains unclear. Therefore, additional high-quality trials with consistent methodology and extended follow-up will be necessary to determine both the short-term and long-term clinical efficacy and practicality of implementing these interventions into practice.
