Reflection on the Impacts of Assistive Robots
Reflection on the Impacts of Assistive Robots
For our capstone project, we're working on an autonomous glucometer delivery system using the Stretch 2 robot. The goal is to help ease the workload on nurses by automating part of the diabetes care process, specifically delivering and applying CGM sensors for elderly patients who might struggle with this on their own. While the technical side of the project is interesting, I’ve been thinking more about the bigger picture (how something like this could impact people and systems beyond just our prototype).
Positive:
Our system has the potential to reduce healthcare costs by minimizing the need for repeated nurse visits, especially for routine tasks like CGM sensor application. In high-demand environments with nursing shortages, robots can supplement care without replacing skilled professionals, enabling nurses to focus on higher-level clinical tasks. Over time, this could lead to improved hospital efficiency and better resource allocation.
Negative:
Initial costs of acquiring, deploying, and maintaining assistive robots remain high. Smaller or underfunded clinics might not be able to afford such technologies, exacerbating existing healthcare inequities. Additionally, while our robot is intended to assist rather than replace nurses, broader adoption of robotics in healthcare raises concerns about job displacement and changing labor dynamics.
Positive:
For elderly and mobility-limited patients, robotic assistance can lead to greater dignity and independence. Many users in our study, including An, an 82-year-old diabetic, appreciated the reduced need for invasive procedures and the autonomy it enabled. By addressing physical limitations and simplifying sensor application, our system can promote inclusivity in healthcare delivery.
Negative:
There is a risk of depersonalization in care if robots are overused or poorly integrated. Human touch and empathy are vital in clinical contexts, especially for vulnerable populations. If robots replace too many aspects of care, patients may feel isolated or dehumanized. There is also a potential for distrust or fear in some patient populations, especially among those unfamiliar with robotic systems.
Positive:
Our system potentially reduces the number of trips nurses must take, both within hospitals and in community care contexts, thereby lowering the carbon footprint associated with transportation. The robot can also operate efficiently with rechargeable power, minimizing energy waste.
Negative:
Manufacturing and disposing of robotic components and batteries contribute to electronic waste. Frequent hardware updates or design iterations could exacerbate this issue. As developers, we must consider long-term sustainability by designing modular, repairable systems and supporting recycling programs for worn-out components.
As future engineers, we are responsible not only for the functionality of our solutions but also for their broader consequences. While our project demonstrates the promise of robotics in easing clinical workflows and enhancing care, it also calls for cautious, ethical deployment that considers equity, sustainability, and human-centered design. Our system is not a replacement for human caregivers but a tool designed to empower them and serve those most in need with respect and reliability.