Comments on: B&Q dips toe into telecare waters

by: Kevin Doughty

Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:56:48 +0000

Steve, you are a better businessman than the chaps from Yale! Most of the stairlift manufacturers and installers have marketed a telephone link to their call centre to provide assistance in the event of an emergency for many years - so the “plumber on-call” arrangement may be commercially viable if the stair-lift example is any indication.
My view is that we are now entering a phase of telecare service development where the quality of response may become more important than the technical detail of the equipment (subject, of course, to some standards that need to be rigorously enforced). The focus will therefore inevitably turn to the different models of call-handling centre that already exist from the small, local centre where the operators know most of their client group, through to the large national centre where objective performance indicators such as time to answer a call may be excellent, but at the expense of the personal touch, and all the benefits that this may bring in the event of an emergency. There’s probably room for local, regional and national call centres - but also a need to consider all the different models and how they may change to accommodate the need for visual interaction, and the safe handling, storage and interpretation of lots more data of a personal nature.

by: Steve Hards

Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:31:07 +0000

Further thought - maybe Yale should offer a link to a call centre as an add-on service.

by: Steve Hards

Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:22:14 +0000

Kevin, yes, the question is whether I would trust my personal safety to a totally automated system like the one from Yale. My first reaction was no, but I’m now questioning that reaction. I trust technology to work in many other aspects of life, although the trust may not build up until I have tested it out a few times. I suppose it would be possible to test this by just programming in a friend’s number.

You pointed out on the recent BBC radio programme that community alarm systems developed at a time when it was not the norm to have a phone. That also meant that call centres were necessary, because clients did not have friends and family with phones to call, but with phone ownership being virtually universal, that no longer applies.

My remaining reservations regarding this particular system are around the fact that there does not seem to be a fail-safe escalation. What happens if none of the three numbers respond, and how do you know?

by: Kevin Doughty

Mon, 18 Feb 2008 23:55:25 +0000

This confirms that the technology is potentially very easy -the challenge is to build a reliable system around it which will give vulnerable people confidence that an alarm will quickly bring appropriate help (and not a plumber charging £50 for a call-out!).
Are we confident that the radio receiver is Class 1 (rather than a cheap device used in security systems), and the auto-dialler will still work with the BT 21st century network? I suspect that we may see a lot of consumer “telecare” on the market very soon which will not be reliable and which may give the technology a bad name.

by: Mary Breeze

Mon, 18 Feb 2008 10:37:29 +0000

The wireless door chime with portable speakers can also be used as a call button to alert a carer who is in the house.

by: Guy Dewsbury

Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:55:44 +0000

This is fantastic news and about time that large retailers are waking up to the needs of disabled people. I also love some of the style flourishes that many of the adaptations have. I would love to hear from an occupational therapist to see what they feel about grab rails with soap dishes in and the notion of disabled people fitting these things themselves adds even more interest to the item. I also wonder if things like professional assessments are really necessary or should we open things up to a market economy where freedom of choice is the rule of law. I suspect that as soon as people find themselves disabled by these contraptions the retailer might have second thoughts. It also begs the question of who is responsible if and when things go wrong… the retailer for selling thigns without any assessment or the purchaser for buying with no (telecare)awareness?

As for the Yale safe and sound, it sounds safe enough as far as it goes but the main concern is the ability for people to push the button and configure other things to it in the future. It seems that this is a further argument for the need for greater interoperability.

The last thing I would personally want is to have my mum rely on a autodialling base station unless it had some professional it would dial and who would answer, such as a call centre.

I think that B&Q have made a real leap forward and I also suspect that the sales of these items might not be just given to disabled people. I can see many of the products being useful and stylish for many homes.

So all in all a three quarter clap to B&Q. They have definitely started something, I await where it will lead.