Table 1

Characteristics of the individual studies

StudyAim of the studyLength of the implementationSettingInstrument (purpose): timepoint of assessmentPopulationRobot (function and name)Location
Overview of the included quantitative studies
Becevic et al35Explore attitudes towards the effectiveness and usability of a telepresence robotPilot for 2 monthsHospital unit (intensive care)Questionnaires (n=29) (to assess usage, satisfaction and effectiveness)—during pilot testingPhysicians, fellows, residents, nurses and respiratory therapistsTo support healthcare personnelUSA
Kirschling et al37Evaluate the feasibility of a robotic courier medication system in a hospitalPilot for 2 monthsHospital unit (orthopaedics and neurology)Form to collect time-motion data and failure modes (to determine delivery load and speed)—during deployment)Preimplementation: nursing staff (n=9)To support healthcare personnelUSA
Surveys (to assess customer satisfaction and perceptions of timeliness, accuracy of deliveries and obtrusiveness)Pharmacy staff (n=83)
Pre-implementation surveys with the same content and additional evaluation questions to evaluation and postimplementationPostimplementation: pharmacy staff (n=22), nursing staff (n=11) and health unit coordinators (n=6)
Rantanen et al29Explore the attitudes of health professionals towards the introduction and use of care robots in home careData collection for 2 monthsIndividual living environmentQuestionnaires (n=200) (to assess personnel attitudes towards care robots, perceived behavioural control and subjective norms, behavioural intentions and factors that affect them)—not applicableHome care personnel, licensed vocational nurses, registered nurses, homemakers, care professionals for older people, social workers, occupational therapist and othersTo support individuals at homeFIN
Rogove et al34Explore the potential barriers to the acceptance and maintenance of robotic telemedicineUsage of robotic telemedicine from less than <1 year to over 5 yearsHospital unit (acute care)Questionnaires (n=106) (to explore barriers to and motivations for implementing a remote telepresence programme)—not applicableAdministrative, physician or nursing staff who were involved in the introduction of a telemedicine programmeTo support healthcare personnelUSA
Stafford et al31Explore psychological acceptance or rejection factorsTwo weeksIndividual living environmentQuestionnaires (n=23) (to assess attitudes towards robots, dimensions of cognitive perceptions)—before robot usage and after usage)Older personsTo support individualsNZ
Vermeersch et al38Assess the acceptability and usability of a remote presence robot in independent living apartments of a wellness clinicTwo weeks; each participant had a 2-hour appointment with a remote presence robotIndividual living environmentMedical history and limited physical examinationAdvanced practice registered nurse (n=1) who completed 13 feedback on the robot encounters questionnaires for residentsRemote presence robot to support healthcare personnel and individuals at homeUSA
Questionnaires (n=26), feedback on the robot encounters questionnaire, additional questions regarding individuals’ perceptionsOlder adults (n=13)
Overview of the included qualitative studies
Beedholm et al36Explore attitudes towards a robotic bathtubn/aNursing homeInterviews (n=8) (to describe daily lives, general attitudes towards health technology, and attitudes towards robot bathtub) – 6 to 17 month after introductionRegional manager, centre manager, nurses, nursing assistant, nursing auxillary, two older persons (a woman and a man)To support healthcare personnelDK
Fehling and Dassen39Identify factors related to the limited application of technical assistance systems in practiceData collection 3 monthNursing homeExpert interviews (n=12) (to assess motives for and barriers to the future implementation of technical assistance systems) - n/aLeadership in nursing homesNot applicableD
Frennert et al24Provide insights into people’s experiences with an assistive robot in their homesThree monthsIndividual living environmentObservations (n=7)Older personsTo support individuals at home, HobbitS
Diaries (n=7) (to document usage)—during the trial
Semi-structured interviews (n=7) (to assess expectations, perceived usage and usefulness and experiences of the trial)—before introduction, in the middle of trial, towards the end of trial and 1 week after the trial
Rantanen et al30Investigate a robotic device to promote medication adherencePhase I (nursing homes) – 457 days (26.9 days per patient)Nursing home and Individual living environmentInterviews (n=44)Residents in nursing homes (n=17)To support individuals at homeFIN
Phase II (individual living environment) – 727 days (26.9 days per patient)Phase I (to verify the robotic functions to ensure safe usage in phase II)Home care patients (n=27)
Phase II (to evaluate the performance and usage of the robot)—after each phase
Yamazaki et al33Assess the reactions of elderly people to a tele-operated android robot (Telenoid)Two-day pilot field trialIndividual living environmentObservations (n=2) (to explore natural reactions to the robot)—during trialOlder adultsTo support individuals at home, TelenoidDK
Overview of the included mixed-method studies
Bedaf et al23Explore ‘how different stakeholders evaluate the role of a robotic assistant at home, what this means for future robot developments and functions as an inspiration on how other scenarios can be designed and implemented’Two scenariosLiving labInteraction scenario (n=10)Older adultsTo support individuals at home, Care-O-BotNL
Interview (n=27) (to reflect on interaction with the robot and discuss its possible role in daily life)—after the scenarioOlder adults (n=9)
Informal caregivers (n=7)
Professional caregivers (n=11)
Glende et al25Enhance knowledge about how to increase acceptance of assistive robots through marketing strategiesn/aNot applicableWorkshop I (n=36 participants; to understand the most important acceptance criteria, facilitators and barriers regarding assistive technology)Different stakeholders Employees in the areas of health, insurance and the municipal government, product development, family members of elderly relativesTo support individualsD/I/S
Workshop II (n=35) (to determine the ‘relevant touchpoints and communication channels regarding robots for different stakeholders’)Marketing experts
Surveys and tests in different test environments (n=70 participants)Primary and secondary user groups
Interviews (n=8)Leading employees in the field of home care and ambulatory care
Hebesberger et al26Assess the social acceptance of and user experience with a long-term autonomous robot (Strandsrobot) in a real-world scenarioFive-day pilot testing followed by a 15-day trialNursing homeInterviews (n=9) (to assess the following topics: usability, social acceptance, user experience, human oriented perception, feeling of security and future perspectives)—within 1 week after the deploymentDoctor, therapist, resident transporter, management, IT staff, administrative employeesTo support (healthcare) personnel and entertain residents, STRANDS RobotA
Observations (to assess behaviour towards robot)—during the trialAll people interacting with the robot (including residents, relatives and staff)
Questionnaire (n=70) (to evaluate attitudes towards the deployment of robots, use and user experience, requirements and potential)—after the trialEmployees
Huisman and Kort27Evaluate and monitor a social robot in daily care and determine whether its use can be extendedTwo yearsNursing home (n=14)Semi-structured interviews (n=35) (to capture expectations of care)—prior to use with professionals and board membersCare professionals and board membersTo support individualsNL
Open interviews (n=not available) (to investigate the views of care professionals who used the robot and to reveal barriers and/or facilitators)—after experience with the robotCare professionals
Modified use questionnaire (to assess the usability, ease of use, ease of learning satisfaction, effects and work)—(n=44) after one and (n=18) after 2 years of experienceCare professionals
Observations (n=150)People with dementia, groups of 6–10 clients
Wu et al32Observe acceptance during interactions with an assistive robotFour weeks; each participant had a 1 hour interaction once a weekLiving labQuestionnaire (to evaluate robot acceptance)—after the first and last sessionsOlder adults (n=11)To support individuals, Kompaii RobotF
Usability performance measures—after third and last session
Interviews—(to evaluate attitudes and willingness to adopt an assistive robot)—after the first and last sessions
Focus group (to validate the interview results)—after a 4-week period
Included systematic review
Peek et al28Explore factors related to the acceptance of ageing technologyn/aIndividual living environmentDatabases: MEDLINE; CINAHL, Scopus
Distinction between preimplementation and postimplementation phases.
n/aTo support individuals at homeGB
  • n/a, not available.