Published today (3 July), Automating the Home considers the potential benefits of socially assistive robots (SARs). These include everything from relatively simple devices such as the golden retriever-like Tombot and easily recognisable seal Paro, designed to interact with children and people with dementia, up to humanoid robots for the home care of older people, already being developed in projects such as JuBot at the Karlsruhe Institute for Technology.
“They can provide assistance with routine tasks to caregivers, such as providing medication reminders, meal preparation and housekeeping, and they can empower individuals to live more independently, by providing support with daily living and offering companionship,” said author Professor Helen Meese, former chair of IMechE’s biomedical engineering division, during a media briefing yesterday.
“They have the capacity to provide continuous monitoring of individuals’ health and wellbeing, detecting emergencies or changes in behaviour well before clinicians or carers might notice.”
These tasks will become particularly important due to ongoing fiscal constraints on health and social care, and the ageing population. “Many [older people] feel that maintaining independence is fundamental to their health, and that their homes play an important role in this,” she said. “Eyesight, loss of hearing and fragility reduce older people's ability to move around their homes, increasing issues such as loneliness, anxiety and the risk of falls.”
While such deployments are few and far between, the NHS has embraced the potential of robots and autonomous systems, including in its vision for a Neighbourhood Health Service focused on community-based care.
The UK’s approach to home care robots nonetheless remains fragmented. The lack of uptake is down to delays in adult social care reform and “continued silence from policymakers” on timelines and governance frameworks, according to the report.
Regulations will need to be updated as robots are mainly used in other environments, Meese said: “The existing regulatory frameworks, primarily designed for industrial and medical environments, must be adapted to address the specific risks of robots in the home, including privacy, cybersecurity and human-robot interaction.
“There is an urgent need for comprehensive and adaptive regulations that balance innovation with user protection. Ethical considerations such as the preservation of human dignity in care must be at the forefront of these regulatory efforts, and collaboration between policymakers, healthcare professionals and the robotics industry is essential.”
She added, in an announcement: “Robots may be ready for our homes – but our policy, ethics and infrastructure are not.”
Your new robot companions
The robotics industry has transformed in recent years, with better sensing, artificial intelligence (AI), energy storage and new materials enabling giant leaps in the development of human-like robots. Companies including Tesla, Agility Robotics and Unitree are developing humanoid devices, with some already deployed in limited industrial applications.
With such rapid ongoing advancements, it might be tempting to assume that humanoid companions will become the most prevalent type of SAR in future – but Professor Meese predicted a more diverse family of machines.
“It has been been proven that [humanoids] are not always the best shape,” she said, in response to a question from Professional Engineering. “It can be quite intimidating for some people – particularly those with dementia, for example, who might struggle to interact with a human face, but actually have no preconceptions with an animal face or something like that, and so are more open to interacting. The same for children.
“So I think we will see a mixture of these robots, dependent on what we want to do. But what we will need is a network that they communicate through – so whether it's a robot on your desk that's maybe helping you by being there as a companion, right through to some machine that's actually going to do your shopping, or taking out the rubbish, they will all interact with each other and understand the needs of the person that they're working alongside.”
Potential users need to be involved in robots’ design from the start, said report contributor Professor Alessandro Di Nuovo from Sheffield Hallam University. “We are emphasising the need to engage people… from the very beginning, not waiting until the end, and then trying to ‘push’ whatever was designed in the lab into the real world. This is why many of these robots have failed in recent times,” he said.
‘Shifting priorities’
Other challenges in development, adoption and integration of SARs include “fragmented political agendas, shifting healthcare priorities and chronic underfunding,” Meese said.
The report explores the available international standards and regional regulations governing the use of robots and autonomous systems in established environments such as factories, considering how they could be integrated or adapted for use in healthcare and home care.
Its recommendations are to:
- “Establish comprehensive safety standards for healthcare and service robots, to address risks specific to the home environment, including interactions with children and pets;
- “Promote ethics and transparent use with guidelines on user consent, transparency in data usage, and measures to prevent over-reliance on robotic assistance;
- “Focus on patient-centred care by prioritising patient safety and comfort in the design and deployment of SARs, ensuring they enhance rather than hinder patient care;
- “Enhance cybersecurity and data protection by implementing stringent privacy and security regulation measures for healthcare robots, addressing data encryption, user consent and transparent data handling practices.”
Want the best engineering stories delivered straight to your inbox? The Professional Engineering newsletter gives you vital updates on the most cutting-edge engineering and exciting new job opportunities. To sign up, click here.
Content published by Professional Engineering does not necessarily represent the views of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.