Reference Use Cases:
RUC 1 – Daily Activity monitoring
RUC 2 – Integrated care
RUC 9 – Mobility monitoring and advice for active mobility
Regarding the mobility scenario, the system has a positive impact in terms of quality of life of the participating drivers, their safety, comfort and awareness towards sustainable urban mobility, as evidenced by the monitored progress from the beginning to the end of the pilot. Similarly, in the Smart Home scenario, a positive overall progress was observed from the beginning until the end of the pilot, in terms of their ability to perform activities of daily living, the Quality of Life of both the older persons and their caregivers, and their self-confidence about their own abilities and the use of the system.
A similar comparison of the results of the CarerQoL questionnaire across the three phases of the pilot is shown in the following figure:
Service acceptance was measured using a validated questionnaire UT-AUT. The analysis focused on the treatment effects of the different RUCs.
A piggy-back Health Technology Assessment (HTA) trial design was used for the economic analysis, which was embedded in a clinical trial. Additional economic cost and outcome data were collected and analyzed, but the trial itself was designed according to clinical issues. The CUA was performed based on the MAFEIP tool.