The Sixth lASTED International Multi-Conference onWireless and Optical CommunicationsWIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKSJuly 3-4, 2006, Banff, AB, Canada

AWARENESS OF WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORK POTENTIAL INHEALTHCAREINDUSTRY:ASECOND UTAUTSTUDY

Einstein LubrinElaine Lawrence

Karla Felix NavarroAgnieszka Zmijewska

University of Technology SydneyAustralia

einstein:elaine:karla:aga@it.uts.edu.au

ABSTRACTThis study concentrates on investigating the degree ofawareness, future adoption and uptake of wireless sensornetworks (WSNs) (in particular Motes) in the HealthMonitoring arena via the use of our second Weo-basedsurvey. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use ofTechnology (UTAUT) has been applied to determine howviable this technology will be for health monitoring inhealthcare institutions and patients' her-es. Results fromour study show positive support for th e acceptance of thetechnology yet reveal some real concerns about the issuesof security, privacy, ethics and safety.

KEYWORDSmotes, wireless sensor networks, mobile healthcaretechnology

1. Introduction

Research has shown that mobile healthcare technologyhas the potential to support people in a variety ofenvironments such as hospitals, health centers, aged carefacilities and in homecare environments. It can also moreeasily manage transitions as patients move from or toacute, emergency, chronic, or primary care [2].Governments and businesses have immediate access tospecific, strategic information from remote web servers.Palm sized devices and flash cards store information thatwould have previously occupied large rooms as paperbased records. Now the use of this digitized informationgathered from various sensors and sensor networks,mobile digital devices and robots has the potentialcapacity to extend the Internet into a pervasiveinterconnected environment which can automaticallymonitor and collect societal, including health, information[16]. For example, the China Knowledge Grid ResearchGroup is exploring the use of sensors to collect people'stemperature and movement at airports, as well ascollecting nature's variables such as humidity or waterpollution to form simulations to study relationships

538-009

among epidemics, society and nature [16]. This is ofparticular relevance in tracking the spread of thepotentially lethal bird flu in 2005 - 2006.

Critical issues that have been identified for mobileeHealth applications include usability, adoption,interoperability, change management, risk mitigation,security and privacy, and return on investment [2]. Thisstudy concentrates on investigating the degree ofawareness, future adoption and uptake of wireless sensornetworks (WSNs) (in particular Motes) in the HealthMonitoring arena via the use of a second Unified Theoryof Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) survey.Part two of this paper provides a background to Motes,the methodology, the significance of Motes as a wirelessnetwork technology for health monitoring and outlines thethree prototypes developed by the research team. It alsodescribes the acceptance model, Unified Theory ofAcceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) which hasbeen applied to determine how viable this technology willbe for health monitoring in healthcare institutions andpatients' homes. In the third section the authors discussthe results of this second web based survey. Finalry"tl1epaper concludes and points the way to future research.

2. Background

The layer of infrastructure that can digitize huge amountsof information coming from nature, either from theenvironment or from our own bodies (or biologicalnetworks) is in the shape of tiny wireless sensor network(WSNs) devices. These are capable of collectingenvironmental data sourced from remote geographicalspaces to the most recondite places in our own bodies, forexample, bio-nano sensors in our blood stream capable ofmonitoring personal health conditions. WSN applicationsmust be capable of collecting, storing and handling hugeamounts of data of a quite heterogeneous nature. Theymust be able to store and efficiently present to the uservast amounts of information in a timely manner.Furthermore these applications, once they start to be

utilized on a more common basis, must interact and sharethe obtained data with similar or even other types ofapplications from all across the world in a secure manner.However, at present, wireless sensor networks (WSN) arefacing challenges in the technical, legal, security andprivacy arena especially when applied to healthcareapplications. It must also be remembered that they arestill in an early stage of development.

2.1 Multi-faceted methodology

The multi-faceted research design comprises of acombination ofresearch methodologies [3]. These includea literature review coupled with the development of threeworking prototypes to test the viability of Motes ashealthcare monitors as well as the web based surveys.Initially the authors undertook a wide ranging literaturereview on the use of Motes in various applications, inparticular in the health monitoring area [4], [5]. Figure 1illustrates examples of health monitoring.

VIa SignalS sentouectlv to themedicalorotessronaisfrom [hemonitoringequrprnent

ambient Ilgr:ong.roomtemperature, airpressure

~

saved semrcs toran roentrtecmdrvtouai

I

Md'{ temperature.tnooo pressure,etc

Monitori ng ofan Individual'ssurroundings

Conte)!awareaoonceno-rs

H.alth Monllorlng

Figure 1 - Health Monitoring Examples

The use of Motes solves many of the problems andachieves many of the goals raised by the four pointsabove. Current devices used for monitoring anindividual's vital statistics, though highly accurate, arebulky and require wired connection between theindividual and the monitoring device. Using Moteswould reduce the amount of space required by thesedevices and only the Mote(s) would be connected to thepatient [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. Monitoring an individual'ssurroundings provides supplementary statistics, whichmay show a correlation with the patient's immediate state.It also serves as a tool for context-aware applications; forexample, room settings in a hospital can be adjustedaccording to the requirements and condition of thepatient. The biggest advantage that health monitoring mayprovide is to serve as an early warning system for doctorsand other medical professionals [6]. Statistics gatheredfrom the Motes may show a trend or correlation betweeneach type of variable that may, upon reaching a setthreshold, alert the health professionals. These statistics

may be accessed via a web server to authorizedindividuals at any moment and location, thus, making it avery flexible system. [6]. Motes are illustrated in Figure 2.

MICA2DOT MI8510 Programmmg Board

/••:"ttll

MTS310 Sensor BoardYFigure 2 - Motes and Sensor Boards inn w.xbow .cum)

The multi-faceted research approach has resulted in thedevelopment of three prototypes to demonstrate theviability of commodity based wireless sensor networks(Motes) for health monitoring of chronically ill or agedpersons. The authors have conducted two anonymous websurveys on the potential acceptance of these devices ashealth monitors by users. This second survey is also basedon the acceptance model, The Unified Theory ofAcceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) as a followup to the previous pilot study [7] to help predict useracceptance or rebuttal of Wireless Sensor Networks andtheir reasons. The statistical analysis of the quantitativedata of this second survey is the subject of the nextiteration of this ongoing work and is discussed in thispaper.

The initial pilot survey targeted a narrow group of ITprofessionals and students from Australia and Canada andproduced positive results (n [participants] = 59) [7]. Inorder to gain a more representative sample of thepopulation, the second follow-up survey sought a widerand more international cohort to ascertain the acceptanceof motes in healthcare environments in a number ofcountries. Some of the questions were modified to ensurepeople were not confused by the language and text boxeswere used to elicit more information from the anonymousparticipants (particpants [n] = 103) from Europe,Australia, Canada and the United States. Finally an openended question at the end of the survey allowed theparticipants to comment on any issues or concerns theymay have had with either the surveyor the use of motes ina healthcare environment.

The authors invited anonymous participation frommedical personnel, health departments and healthacademics and students as well as from a wide range ofacademics from different faculties such as Business,Information Technology and Law in a number of

Li::ht Sensor Rl'adin::s - \Iott's-~,. ,', •••' •• ".:",~ h-' n.." •••.• 1( •• ,....."'.:-~ 01 't"l·•..J~·{••o{.C~'-.•\"••I.rrj

i .•...·...'" "

, '... ;.'.; ~; "J; ;'~. • •• , ...;-' -:; ; l, ..••... ,". ,... ., , ...•.•.. ' -; ;,' ~'. . ,

Figure 3c - Prototype 3: InterfaceFigure 3a - Prototype 1: MRTG Graphs

<lt~ ~

J . •• .............- ",~ ,-"""""'"r

•. 'Of .. :,,""'Vj~Q ...~. ~e-";'~...• \ ~..~-

..' :1. . ...J!

Figure 3b - Prototype 2: PDA

countries including Norway, Greece, the United States,Canada and Australia. Participants were emailed thesurvey's website address and asked to complete the websurvey and distribute the survey to colleagues in the sameindustry sector. After 2 months we had 103 completedsurveys - as three people had completed the first surveyonly 100 surveys were used with the aim of investigatingthe degree of awareness of this type of technology and itspotential acceptance.

2.2 Health monitoring system prototypes

The development of three prototypes helped the authors tounderstand the intricacies of working with these tinydevices over a period of24 months. Many technical issueshad to be resolved as these devices are still in apreliminary development stage and they are expensive.Our experience has been gained by working with a set of10 motes (both Mica2 and Mica2Dot Motes) and sensorssuch as light, temperature, sound, and accelerometersrather than simulators which seem to be used by manyother researchers in the wireless sensor network arena.

The first research test bed demonstrated that the use of thenetwork management tool, Multi Router Traffic Grapher(MRTG) enables data from the motes to be displayedgraphically on the web and thus allows medical staff theability to access patient data from anywhere in the worldby the use of a simple web browser [8] (see Figure 3).

The second research test bed demonstrated a similarsystem using PDAs. It was able to show that MRTG'scompression is such that even with months of data, theamount of space required would only be a matter ofhundreds of kilobytes. A remote feature of our system isalso available, where authorized users are able to view theinformation graphically on a website. This data can bedisplayed on a laptop or PDA which has Internetconnectivity. The system is more easily set up than theproprietary implementations [6]. Our third prototypeimproves on the performance and reliability of the systemby separating the 'business logic' from the interface. The

addition of Crossbow's Stargate allows for the ability toaccess the Mote sensor network by various mobiledevices (PDA, cellular, etc).

2.3 The Surveys: Tools for applying UTAUT to Motes

The purpose of this paper is to identify the currentperception of Motes, and in general, wireless sensornetworks and determine its viability as a commercialproduct in a health care environment and/or as a lifesavingtool. The use of an opinion survey combined with areference theory is the first stage in making earlypredictions of the rate of uptake. Conducting such asurvey serves a number of purposes. It validates a knownor new acceptance model, which can be used ondeveloping new technologies.

2.4 Design and implementation of the second UTUA Tsurvey

Traditionally acceptance models have been used to helpexplain and predict adoption of new technologies. Theyare based on specific factors, or constructs, that influencethe individual's decision to adopt or reject a newtechnology. The paper [13] closely examined eightacceptance and adoption theories and combined therelevant constructs from different theories under onemodel, the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use ofTechnology (UT AUT). UTA UT includes fourdeterminants of user acceptance and technology usage.These acceptance models shared seven major conceptsaccording to their constructs, of which four are considereddirect determinants for user acceptance, namely [13]:

• Social influencePerformance expectancyEffort expectancyFacilitating conditions

Along with these determinants are moderators (gender,age, experience and voluntariness of use) which affect thestrength of the determinants. These determinants and

moderators influence an individual's behavioral intention(his/her planned intention towards the technology) -generally, to use it or not [13] (Figure 4). Motes are stillin the research and development phase so only a part ofthis model was employed with the aim of informingresearchers how the public perceives the new technology(whether they were previously aware of it or not). Theresults can lead to a new direction for the research -tailored for eventual public and commercial use.

SooalInfluence

F-aofltatu'lgCondItions

Figure 4 - UTAUT model [13]

To obtain as broad coverage of issues as possible, andbecause of a limited number of initiatives in Australia,web-based surveys were used in this research instead offace-to-face interviews. This ensures independence oftime and place, and makes it possible to obtain responsesfrom people from all around the world. Methods such asfocus groups and personal interviews are more difficult toarrange for global responses. It also means that differenttime zones are not a problem, since the respondent can fillin surveys at any time and at their convenience. It offers asimple means of obtaining the results in a secure andanonymous fashion without having to undergo severalprocedures to ensure ethical standards, as this is meant tobe the next stage in our research and to ensure morefocused and open ended responses than were ascertainedfrom the first pilot.

The questions were grouped in 4 Sections - Section 1asked if the respondents were 1) familiar with motes and2) whether they had previously completed the survey. Ifthe respondents had not heard about motes, they were ableto go to a set of screens which defined Motes and picturedthem. Section 2 dealt with queries about Healthcare andMonitoring to establish if the respondents were satisfiedwith the current healthcare in their countries. Section 3consisted of a series of questions that related to the use ofMotes in Health monitoring, based on the four UTAUTdeterminants, namely Performance expectancy, Effortexpectancy, Social influence and Facilitating conditions.Section 4 was concerned with demographic questions.The aim of the survey was to further test how themoderators affect the strength of the 4 determinants asdefined by UTAUT. As mentioned previously, the

qualitative analysis of the answers to the open endedquestion at the end of the survey when the respondentswere asked to comment on any issues they had with thesurvey and/or the use of Motes in Health Monitoring hasbeen explored in [8].

2.5 Survey population characteristics

The criteria used for user acceptance to a new technologyfollow the UTAUT model. To measure each criterion, aset of questions was formulated to relate to the Motestechnology (Tables 1 to 4). Questions regarding therespondents' gender, age, education and career, inaddition to their awareness of the technology, weresolicited. For this survey the responses numbered 103.Most of the respondents were from Australia, and theother countries represented are shown on the graph thatfollows where AU is Australia, CA Canada, GR Greece,AT Austria, JO Jordan, US the United States of Americaand NO Norway.

Awareness of Motes by Country

80 ...,---------------,

60

40

20 ~b;;;-----------1

AU

o Not heard of 61motes

• Heard of motes 20

Figure 5 - Demographic Data

o Not heard of 34motes

• Heard of motes 20

Figure 6 - Male and Female Representation

aware)

• Male

iii Male

• Mal,,"

Figure 7 - Social Influence Responses (from people who had not heard of Motes previously)

The survey covered a time period of two months with thecut off date of 31 May 2005. Seventy five people whocompleted the second survey had not heard of Motesbefore, twenty five had heard about them whilst three hadcompleted the first survey so did not have to fill it in allagain. Two of these last mentioned people reportedpositive reactions to the potential use of motes in thehealth monitoring arena.

Of the people who had heard about motes before, twenty(20) were male and seven (7) were female, as shown inFigure 6 on the previous page. In this group eight (8)classified themselves as students, ten (10) as engineeringprofessionals, five (5) as academics and one (1) asmedical. In the group that had not heard about Motesbefore, thirty four (34) were male and thirty eight (38)female and one did not report gender.

This is in marked contrast with the preliminary surveywhen females were so significantly under-represented thatwe were not able to draw statistical conclusions for them.The breakdown of professional status for this group wasas follows: twenty six (26) students, nine (9) engineers,twenty six (26) academics and eleven (11) medical. Forthe three people completing the survey for a second time,two (2) were males and one (1) was a female - the femaleidentified herself as an engineer, while the males selectedengineenng and academic for their professionalidentification.

3. Quantitative Results and Discussion

The survey participants were asked to rate each questionaccording to its relevance to them. A five-scale Likertmeasurement system was used - which ranged from'Strongly Disagree'{l} to 'Strongly Agree' {5} - asopposed to previous validated measurement systems of

seven levels [12] This takes into account that the timeperiod that the survey was conducted was short, as thenumber of available respondents would not be sufficientfor larger scales. For each factor, we present graphs(Figures 7-10) representing the proportion of the totalresponses that fall within each category in a 5-point Likertscale (1 being 'Strongly Disagree' to 5 being 'StronglyAgree'). Within each category, the contributions of theresponses of the various gender and age groups have alsobeen represented. For example, a total of 140 responseslie in the 4th category (Mostly Agree) in Figure 8,gathered from Performance Expectancy questions, ofwhich a certain proportion was contributed by the Male51-65 or Female 36-50 classification.

3.1 Social Influence

Four moderators have a direct influence on socialinfluence: gender, age, voluntariness and experience.With gender differences, women are predicted to placemore importance on this factor than with men due topsychological differences (i.e. - sensitivity, emotional,subjectivity) [9], [15]. In addition, as he/she grows withage, this determinant will be more salient as social factorsbecome increasingly pertinent. However, as experiencegrows (and hence more awareness and objectivity), theimportance placed on Social Influence decreases [14].Due to social perception of the technology - from thenumber of people using it to its reputation - an individualcan be significantly influenced in their decision to use it.

Figure 7 illustrates the frequency of answers, showing abreakdown according to gender and age in a Likert scaleof 1-5 (Response Range) given a specific range ofquestions for a particular determinant, in this case SocialInfluence. This graph reports on the responses of peoplewho had not heard of Motes before. The figure illustrates

cy (Un

C Ma'fl>

• Ma,e

Figure 8 - Responses to Performance Expectancy Questions (people who have not heard of Motes before)

a trend that while the majority of people agree roughlyhalf of the population will select the other alternativesthus making the average close to the middle response (3)of no opinion. Please note that the responses are to therange of questions regarding Social Influence.

Table 1 - Sample Social Influence Questions

In the graph the females are more likely to agree with thequestions on Social Influence. In our pilot survey femaleswere under-represented but the results supported theSocial Influence hypothesis - where the effect is strongergenerally with younger women and those with minimalexperience (students). As mentioned previously, in thissecond survey the numbers of female participants wasmuch higher than in the pilot survey and age groups morewidely varied. Of the persons reporting as females in thegroup that had not heard about motes before, 16 were inthe 20 - 35 age group, 18 were in the 36 - 50 group andtwo were in the 51-65 group. One person did not reportgender details in the 51-65 age group. Nine of the femalesin the 36-50 age group who had not heard of Motes before

classified themselves as Medical which could have aninfluence on their answers. The younger males (20-35 agegroup) also reported a positive response to the SocialInfluence questions. From the text boxes, two contrastingopinions are presented below.

"This is an interesting and unexplored issue - usingmotes in Healthcare. It might be worthwhile tohave some pilot tests using Motes in health care -or at least publicizing them. "

"1 view them as the next generation ofmicroprocessor and nothing to get excited about. "

The first comment indicates the need to demonstrate ourprototypes as it would appear that some people did notfully understand them despite the fact that a shortdescription and pictures were displayed for those whowanted an explanation. The second comment isinteresting as it is from a person who was unaware ofmotes before this survey but did not feel they representedanything special.

3.2 Performance Expectancy

Originally defined as the "degree to which an individualbelieves that using the system will help him/her to attaingains in job performance," this determinant has beenmodified to fit according to gains in standard ofliving/quality of life due to the use of the technology [13].Performance Expectancy is the strongest determinant ofintention [13]; however, its effect is moderated by age andgender. It has been shown that technology use is differentalong gender and age lines. For example, men -especially young men - tend to be more receptive to newtechnology [10]. The two moderators are interrelated asdifferences in age represent psychological and societaldifferences [13].

m Male 51-65

m Male 36-50

• Male 20-35I

o Female 51-65

• Female 36-50

Figure 9 - Responses to Effort Expectancy

The hypothesis is :

The influence of Performance Expectancy onbehavioral intention will be moderated by genderand age, such that the effect will be stronger formen and particularly for younger men [13], [1].

Below is a selection of sample questions pertaining toPerformance Expectancy in this second survey.

I normally

oflife

feel that using Motes would increasef a medical emergency

in case

feel that Motes will be anonitoring systems

rromnrevrous and current

Table 2 - Performance Expectancy Sample Questions

Figure 8 (from the previous page) outlines the responsesto the questions relating to performance expectancy fromthe people who had not heard of Motes before. It isnotable that most people agreed with the propositions. Itis clear that men and women in the 20 - 35 age group areseen to be more receptive to the technology. Results fromthis survey confirmed that younger men did have a moreaffirmative response towards the Motes' usefulness aspredicted by the model and as seen from the results of thefirst and second survey. In the first survey however thenumber of female participants was too low to allow forany meaningful deductions. The text boxes solicited arange of comments regarding Motes in healthenvironments which illustrated concerns about possiblenegative side effects for health as well as ethical andprivacy worries.

"Can't see a need for them. "

"Energy - How often do 1need to change thebatteries? "

"The developers should consider the radiationeffect of these sensors on the human body. "

"Human monitoring of any type needs seriousconsideration in ethical terms and also in termsof how implication of data collection and howthis data will be used beside the purpose offirstpatient benefit from whom it is collected. "

3.3 Effort Expectancy

This is traditionally the "degree of the ease of use of thesystem" [13]. Unlike in the original model, only the ageand gender are likely to be significant in influencing anindividual's Effort Expectancy. Experience impliesinteraction with the system, which would not be the case;thus, it will not be included. Gender and age are stillincluded as moderators, having more effect for women.Previous research has shown that this determinant willhave a stronger influence on behavioral intention withwomen than with men, and more so with those who areolder [15].

The hypothesis for Effort Expectancy is:

The influence of Effort Expectancy on behavioralintention will be moderated by gender and age,such that the effect will be stronger for women,particularly older women [13], [1].

The results presented in Figure 9 show that a majority ofthe respondents either replied with a 3 (no opinion) or a 4(agree) to the questions.

Figure 10 - Responses to Facilitating Conditions

Table 3 outlines sample questions that were asked tomeasure Effort Expectancy whilst Figure 9 shows thefrequency of answers according to sex and age grouping.

feel in the homegood fit

are

feel that my interaction with the

Motes

Table 3 - Sample Questions for Effort Expectancy

The findings suggest that there needs to be more exposureof Motes to the general public; without it, they cannothave a solid opinion on it without making assumptions.

Comments regarding the use of motes reflected the abovegeneralization:

"They have a long way to go to be a practicalsolution in the healthcare environment. "

"I would be more comfortable with the idea ofthem if] saw them in action. "

"I tend to be skeptical about the ease of usingsuch devices and the availability ofhelp whenthings go wrong. "

"I would be concerned about ... maintainability ofthese Motes and whether they are safe. "

3.4 Facilitating Conditions

This determinant deals with the "degree to which anindividual believes that an organizational and technicalinfrastructure exists to support use of the system [13]." Ithas been augmented to reflect a more individual basiswhere cost of using the system, compatibility withlifesty Ie/surroundings and aesthetics are considered.Research has shown that this determinant is not assignificant in influencing an individual's behavioralintention when Effort and Performance Expectancy arepresent [13]. The reason is that Effort Expectancysuggests the presence of facilitating conditions andsimilarly with Performance [13].

The hypothesis for Facilitating Conditions is:

(a) Facilitating Conditions will not have a significanteffect on behavioral intention [13], [I].

It has also been shown that Facilitating Conditions dohave an effect on the usage of the technology. Withgrowing experience, its effect is stronger due to people'sincreased ability to sustain use of the technology. Age isadditionally a moderator in this case, as older individualstend to require more support in dealing with the system[19].

(b) The influence of Facilitating Conditions on usagewill be moderated by age and experience, suchthat the effect will be stronger for olderindividuals, particularly those with increasingexperience [19J, [2].

Note that usage here cannot be validated as the Moteshave only recently become commercially available, andthe main users are researchers. It only provides validationup to an individual's perceived intention on usage.

Table 4 - Sample Questions for Facilitating Conditions

The sample questions are set out in Table 4 whilst theresults of the survey for the questions on FacilitatingConditions are contained in Figure 10. Similarly to EffortExpectancy, responses were concentrated between 3 and 4in this graph. Some of the written responses would appearto confirm some issues here:

" Motes sound very interesting - I would supporttheir use if they were recommended afterresearch to support their functionality. "

" Why don't you mention Privacy?"

" I do feel that motes may violate privacyparticularly if the wireless networking is notvery secure. This is probably my majorconcern. "

4. Conclusion

Our research reports on a second UTAUT survey that hasattempted to explore the factors that may affect theadoption of Motes as a tool in health monitoring.Preliminary results from this survey did show positivesupport for the acceptance of the technology yet revealedsome real concerns about the issues of security, privacy,ethics and safety. A major drawback with the survey isthe fact that most people were unaware of the technologybefore doing the survey and thus felt unable to make aconsidered judgment. Our next step is to demonstrate themost recent prototype to focus groups of elderly andinfirm people to allay some of the fears people seem tohave about the suitability of Motes as a tool formonitoring health issues.

References

[1] Anderson, J. E. and Schwager, P. H. 2003 SMEAdoption of Wireless LAN Technology: Applying theUTAUT Model. Proceedings of the 7th Annual Con! ofthe Southern Association for Information Systems

[2] Archer, N. 2005 Mobile eHealth: Making the Case,mGovernment. The European Conference onmGovernment, Brighton, 11-12 July 2005

[3] Giaglis, G. 2005 Application for Mobile Researchgrant - under review

[4] Lawrence, E., Felix-Navarro, K., Riudavets, J. andMessina, M. 2004 Macroscopic Sensor Networks:Application Issues in the Healthcare Industry. Acceptedfor Third International ISCA Conference on ComputerScience, Software Engineering, Information technologyand eBusiness and Applications (CSITeA 2004),December 27-29

[5] Lawrence, E. and Lawrence, J. 2004 Wireless SensorNetworks in the Bio-MedicallHealthcare Industry:Technical and Legal Perspectives. Proceedings of theThird International Conference in M-Business, July 11-12, New York, USA

[6] Lubrin, E., Lawrence, E. and Felix-Navarro, K. 2005Wireless Remote Health Monitoring with Motes.ICMB2005, Sydney ll- 13 July

[7] Lubrin, E., Lawrence, E. and Felix-Navarro, K. 2005On the Acceptance of Motes in Mainstream HealthMonitoring. Proceedings of IADIS eCommerceConference, Porto, Portugal, December 2005

[8] Lubrin, E., Lawrence, E., Felix-Navarro, K. andCuljak, G. 2006 Exploring the Benefits of Using Motes toMonitor Health: An Acceptance Survey. Proceedings ofMobile Computing and Learning Conferece (MCL 2006),Mauritius April 2006

[9] Miller, J.B. 1976 Toward a New Psychology ofWomen, Beacon Press, Boston

[10] Minton, H.L. and Schneider, F.W. 1990 DifferentialPsychology, Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, IL

[11] Riudavets, J., Felix-Navarro, K., Lawrence, E.,Steele, R. and Messina, M. Multi Router Traffic Grapherfor Body Area Network Surveillance. Accepted forpublications WSEAS International

[12] Taylor, S. and Todd, P. 1995. Assessing IT Usage:The Role of Prior Experience. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19,No. 2,pp. 561-570

[13] Venkatesh, V. et al. 2003 User Acceptance ofInformation Technology: Toward a Unified View.Research Article, MIS Quarterly, September 2003, Vol.27 No. 3,pp425-478

[14] Venkatesh, V. and Morris, M.G. 2000 Why Don'tMen Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, SocialInfluence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance andUsage Behavior. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 24, No.1, pp. 115-139,2000

[15] Venkatash, V. et al. 2000 A Longitudinal FieldInvestigation of Gender Differences in IndividualTechnology Adoption Decision-Making Processes.Original Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, Vol.83, No.1, pp 33-60

[16] Zhuge, H. 2005 Exploring an Epidemic in an e-Science Environment. Communications of the A CM,September 2005, vol 48, 110 9

The Sixth lASTED International Multi-Conference onWireless and Optical Communications - WOC 2006

Welcome from the General Chair

On behalf of lASTED and the members of the international technical program committee, it is withgreat pleasure that I welcome you all to the Sixth lASTED International Conference on Wireless andOptical Communications (WaC 2006) in Banff, Alberta, Canada.

In spite of the progress made to date in the wireless and optical technology fields, there still exist manyunresolved technical challenges. Solutions are proposed to some of these challenges by the 74 technicalpapers scheduled for presentation at this year's wac conference.

We have received a total of3..l..9-papersubmissions out of which 138 papers were accepted and 97 paperswere eventually published in the Conference Proceedings. These 97 papers have been arranged into 13technical sessions. In addition, we have organized 2 tutorials: 1 tutorial on Computer Systems andApplications (CSA) and another on Wireless Networks and Emerging Technologies (WNET). We alsohave 2 keynote addresses and 3 plenary addresses to be given by renowned experts in the field, invitedfrom industry, academia, and a government agency.

The technical program that you have in your hands is the result of the great effort of the members of theinternational program committee (IPC). This year we introduced a double-blind review process, andindependent reviewers were selected from both the IPC members and many of the submitting authors.This extensive review process ensures the very high quality of the technical program. I thank all themembers of the technical program committee and technical reviewers for volunteering their time andenergy to conduct very high quality reviews, even at very short notice. Special thanks to all our invitedspeakers for coming to wac 2006. Lastly, thank you to all the lASTED staff for their effort and hardwork in organizing every detail of the wac 2006 Conference.

Once again, I welcome you all to wac 2006, and trust you enjoy not only the technical program butalso hope you will find some time to enjoy the beautiful Banff sceneries.

Have a great Conference!

Abraham O. Fapojuwowac 2006 General Chair

lASTED Wireless Sensor Networks Conference Proceeding Page 1 of3

[ Conferences] [ Membership] [ Publications] [ FAQ] [ Contact Us] [ Search][Home]

TABLE OF CONTENTSWSN 2006

Banff, Alberta, CanadaJuly 03, 2006 to July 04, 2006

Application Requirements and Case Studies

538-009Awareness of Wireless Sensor Network Potentia! in Healthcare Industry: ASecond UTA UT StudyE. Lubrin, E. Lawrence, K.F. Navarro, and A. Zmijewska (Australia)

538-027S~~le-Free Wireless Sensor NetworksK.B. Chia, W. Su, and TT Ha (USA)

538-800M~ltuaiinforrnation HelpiDg to Desig~Wireless Sensor Ne1\Y_QIkwithCensoringData Transmission and On/Off SensorsNM. Murad, D. Carsenat, C. Decroze, T Monediere, and B. Jecko (France)

538-028DirQ: A Directed Query Dissemination Scheme for Wireless Sensor NetworksS. Chatterjea (The Netherlands), S. De Luigi (Italy), and P. Havinga (TheNetherlands)

538-020Passive Wireless Temperature Sensing usin&-RFTechnology for an AutomotiveApplicationD. Gould, A. Sklorz, M Meiners, W. Lang, and W. Benecke (Germany)

538-013I)eploym~nLQfAd-HoGSensor Networks in Und~rgrQlmd MinesA. Chehri, P. Fortier, and P.-M. Tardif(Canada)

Localization, Coverage, and Configuration

mhtml:file://C:\2006FOLDERS\2006Banff\IASTED Wireless Sensor Networks Confer... 4/18/2007

lASTED Wireless Sensor Networks Conference Proceeding Page 2 of3

Algorithms for WSN

538-050Indoor Localization System using RSSI Measurement of Wireless SensorNetwork based OlLZigll<;eStandardM. Sugano, T Kawazoe, Y Ohta, and M. Murata (Japan)

538-046Modeling the Coverage Problem in Wireless Sensor Networks as F100rplanningand Placement ProblemsSJ Habib (Kuwait)

538-026CJ~;;;;ifLc~tionu~ngEffici~ntLlJ D_~QQmPQ_;;i1iQniILS~ll;;mJl~l;;Z.H Kamal, A. Gupta, 1. Lilien, and A. Khokhar (USA)

538-011An Energy- EfficientAlgQIithm for Positioning and Map ExtraG-lingJ;2yConnecti yityjll:W:in~less Sensor Ne_twoskHS. Bidgoli and M. Fathy (Iran)

538-036Passive and Cost Effective People Indoor Location Tracking System forUbiquitous HealthcareW-Y Chung, VK. Singh, D.-U Jeong (Korea), R. Mylylae (Finland), and H Lim(Korea)

538-017A Sc~l~ble LocatiQn::b~sed AppliQ_~IionLayer Multicast Proto_colin MANETK.-D. Kim, J-H. Park, K. Lee, H-Y Kim, and S.-H Kim (Korea)

538-022AnJ:~.C4basegLight Weight Secure PIQlocol for Sen~9r NetworksCN. Zhang and Q. Yu (Canada)

Performance Considerations

538-024On Throughput of Multipath Data Transmission over Multihop Ad Hoc NetworksL. Zhao and J G. Delgado-Frias (USA)

538-021Adaptive Resource Management in Sensor Network using R~dius ConfigurationAlgOrithmsI.-F. Su, C-H Ke, and C. Lee (Taiwan)

538-016

mhtml:file://C:\2006FOLDERS\2006Banff\IASTED Wireless Sensor Networks Confer... 4118/2007

lASTED Wireless Sensor Networks Conference Proceeding Page 3 of3

K-RTP: A ReliaQl~Inms12ort Layer Protocol for Wireless_SensQLNJ~t.wQrk~V Pathari, M. Jose, G.R. Ragul, and P.M. Irshad (India)

538-043A Localized Fault:Detection Algorithm in Sensor NetworksC-R. u and C-K. Liang (Taiwan)

538-018A Node Revocation Scheme for Sensor NetworksP.-J Chuang and T-H. Chao (Taiwan)

AUTHOR INDEX

mhtml:file:IIC:\2006FOLDERS\2006Banff\lASTED Wireless Sensor Networks Confer... 4118/2007

~~10w~[b~ LJ'-1U>...A...-

©(Q)um[}i]O:Du~~\~ilfA,I~

o Communication Systemsand Applications

o Optical CommunicationSystems and Networks

a Wireless Networks andEmerging TechnologiesEditor: A.O. Fapojuwo

a Wireless Sensor NetworksEditor: B. Kaminska

July 3-5, 2006Banff, Alberta, Canada /

ISBN: 0-88986-565-5