Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Two arms are better than one for robot dressers, says researcher

Dr Jihong Zhu testing out a robot dresser (University of York/PA)
Dr Jihong Zhu testing out a robot dresser (University of York/PA)

A two-armed robot to help someone get dressed could make the process more comfortable for the person receiving care and free up time for stretched staff, a researcher has said.

Dr Jihong Zhu, a robotics researcher at the University of York’s Institute for Safe Autonomy, has been testing a two-armed assistive dressing scheme, which he said has not been attempted in previous research.

It is suggested the approach could be more effective and comfortable than the current one-armed machines designed to help an elderly person or a person with a disability get dressed.

Dr Zhu said: “We know that practical tasks, such as getting dressed, can be done by a robot, freeing up a care worker to concentrate more on providing companionship and observing the general wellbeing of the individual in their care.

“It has been tested in the laboratory, but for this to work outside of the lab we really needed to understand how care workers did this task in real-time.”

His team used a method called learning from demonstration, meaning a human could demonstrate the movement and the robot would learn that action, as opposed to an expert being needed to programme it.

He said: “It was clear that for care workers two arms were needed to properly attend to the needs of individuals with different abilities.

“One hand holds the individual’s hand to guide them comfortably through the arm of a shirt, for example, whilst at the same time the other hand moves the garment up and around or over.

“With the current one-armed machine scheme a patient is required to do too much work in order for a robot to assist them, moving their arm up in the air or bending it in ways that they might not be able to do.”

Care England, representing social care providers across the country, said robotics can have a role in the sector but cannot replace “relationship-based care”.

Chief executive Professor Martin Green said: “With significant staff shortages in the care sector there will be increasing emphasis on finding new and innovative ways of supporting people.

“Robotics will have their place, but it must be the choice of the individual as to whether or not they want some of their care to be undertaken by robots.

“We must also acknowledge that robots can never replace relationship-based care which relies on people-to-people contact and connection.”

Caroline Abrahams, charity director at Age UK, welcomed scientific research into robotics and other technologies to support people who need help, but said that while future innovations might work alongside or even replace some of the work of human beings “we are clearly a long way from that right now”.

She said: “It’s not just that the technology needs to develop further, it’s also that it has to be manufactured in a way that keeps down the cost.

“Given that social care is, however unfairly, a low wage occupation, it’s hard to see the economics working out to allow the wholesale expansion of technology within the next few years, even if it proves possible to develop it to the degree of sophistication required.

“Some policymakers have opined that robotics are set to solve the social care workforce crisis but if so, it’s unlikely to happen any time soon.

“Today’s care workers therefore don’t need to worry about robots replacing them and, in any event, the kindness and human touch they offer is really precious and highly valued by many people who benefit from good personal care.”

Dr Zhu said the next step in their research will be to test the robot’s safety limitations such as ensuring it can be stopped or changed mid-action “and whether it will be accepted by those who need it most”.

He added: “Trust is a significant part of this process.”

Researchers said their work was in collaboration with researchers from Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands and was funded by the Honda Research Institute Europe.