Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41980241›Full record

ArticleJMIR nursing2026

Nurses' Evaluation of a Service Robot for Inpatient Care: Technology Acceptance Study.

Christopher Friese, Robert Klebbe, Anika Heimann-Steinert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Christopher FrieseDepartment of Geriatrics and Medical Gerontology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany, 49 30450553796.ORCID 0000-0003-1564-0492
Robert KlebbeDepartment of Geriatrics and Medical Gerontology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany, 49 30450553796.ORCID 0000-0001-7182-4232
Anika Heimann-SteinertInstitute of Public Health, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8025-266X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The integration of robotic systems into nursing practice is increasingly discussed as a potential strategy to alleviate workload and support care processes in response to demographic changes and staffing shortages. However, the acceptance of nursing staff as primary end users remains a critical determinant for successful implementation. Despite technological advances, the practical requirements and perspectives of nursing staff have not been adequately considered in research and development efforts to date. Objective: Building on the user-centered development approach applied, this study aimed to examine nursing staff's evaluation of a service robot designed to assist with routine tasks in inpatient care, as well as their intention to use it, while accounting for technology-specific and psychological determinants of acceptance. Methods: A total of 30 nurses tested the robot across 3 application scenarios (information service, item delivery, and beverage delivery) in a simulated care setting, alternating between the roles of nurse and care recipient. Acceptance-related constructs, including intention to use, were measured using the Technology Usage Inventory. General attitudes toward robots were assessed via the General Attitudes Towards Robots Scale. Participants' prior experience with robotics was also documented. Spearman rank correlations and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for analysis. Results: The robot was rated positively across all dimensions. Usability was high (median 20, IQR 18-21; scale range 3-21), as was perceived usefulness (median 21, IQR 16-24; range 4-28). Skepticism was low (median 10.5, IQR 7-12; scale range 4-28), and accessibility was moderate (median 10, IQR 8-13; scale range: 3-21). Intention to use was strong (median 224.5, IQR 157-248; scale range 0-300) and correlated positively with usability (rs(28)=0.505; P=.004), perceived usefulness (rs(28)=0.74; P<.001), and accessibility (rs(28)=0.628; P<.001), and negatively with skepticism (rs(28)=-0.516; P=.004). More positive personal attitudes toward robots were also associated with higher perceived usefulness (rs(28)=0.549; P=.002) and greater intention to use (rs(28)=0.483; P=.007). No significant differences in intention to use were found between participants with and without prior robotics experience (U=83.5; P=.62). Conclusions: The findings indicate a high level of acceptance among the participating nursing staff for the developed service robot within the tested scenarios. Considering the chosen user-centered development approach, they further underscore the need for strategies that combine participatory design, transparent communication of system capabilities and limitations, and structured opportunities for hands-on experience. Such measures, together with proactive knowledge transfer and skills development, are essential to sustainably leverage the practical potential of service robotics in nursing practice.

Indexed as

NursesRoboticsAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnairesassistive technologydigital healthhuman-robot interactioninpatient carenursingroboticsservice roboticstechnology acceptanceuser-centered design

Identifiers

PMID41980241
PMCPMC13078706

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.