When I talk with seniors and caregivers about the limitations of traditional PERS, I am always amazed at the number of heads that nod in agreement.  It seems that most people inherently understand the limitations of PERS; yet there are roughly 1.5 million PERS users in the United States.  So does traditional PERS work?  Or do they offer false claims of security?  And are the limitations preventing adoption? Or is there simply a lack of affordable alternatives?

First, what is PERS?

PERS stands for Personal Emergency Response System.  Legacy PERS devices are also referred to as medical alarms or “panic button” devices.  PERS is used primarily for seniors who live alone and may need help.  The number one reason PERS is used is for seniors that have a fear or risk of falling.  The devices work by offering a button that the senior must manually activate in the event of a fall. 

Advantages and Disadvantages

In 1996, researchers at the University of Virginia Health System compiled an excellent studyon the benefits of PERS.  The report  outlines lowered healthcare utization, lowered costs, and increased physiological benefits (in the form of more confidence in their own health from senior users).   The report cited research demonstrating that PERS users spend roughly 13 times fewer days in skilled nursing facilities compared to seniors not using PERS.  The report also showed a healthcare cost savings by demonstrating that PERS users “used fewer medical and social support services than did the control subjects…[yielding] a cost benefit ratio of 1.87:1″ 

Yet, many shortcomings of PERS have been cited.  Laurie Orlov recently posted an article on her site discussing a similar topic.  In Laurie’s post, she outlines two shortcomings: 1) requirement of manually pressing the button and 2) ineffectiveness if not worn.

These shortcomings are also well documented in a recent study published  British Medical Journal.  The report found that in 141 falls among elderly where a medical alarm was installed and in use, 80% of the seniors did not activate the alarm during the fall (yikes!  4 out of 5) .  This resulted in seniors lying on the ground or floor for unnecessary and dangerous lengths of time.  The reasons for not activating the alarm were varied but included “difficulty activating the alarm”, “not wearing [the pendant]“, or “wearing and choosing not to activate it” (mostly because of a fear of hospitalization or to avoid embarassment).

In our own interviews with seniors and caregivers, we have identified a third deficiency of legacy PERS – they are “one-way” devices.  By “one-way”, I mean that they allow a senior user to signal for help, but offer no way for an adult child caregiver to confirm that their loved one is okay.  Worry, stress, and anxiety is unfortunately the common theme among adult child caregivers tending to an elderly loved one.  Their only tool for checking on a parent is the telephone; and if mom does not answer the phone, worry and anxiety sets in quickly. 

PERS 2.0

We coined the phrase “PERS 2.0″ in January, 2009 when we launched myHalo.  However, I have also seen PERS+ (”PERS Plus”) and Auto PERS used to refer to similar products and services that now offer an automated emergency response component and a much needed enhancement on legacy PERS solutions.  In particular, myHalo offers a wearable device (belt clip or an invisible chest strap worn out of sight) that can detect falls and signal for help automatically – without having to press a button.  For compleess, both myHalo devices also include a legacy button as well (directly on the wearable device). 

myHalo works just like legacy PERS plus  provides the following benefits:

1. Automatic Fall Detection. Fall detection without the need of a “panic button” which is often inaccessible when unconscious.
2. User Compliance Tracking. myHalo Complete can detect when the device is not worn – alerting caregivers of the heightened risk or to provide gentle reminders to seniors that wish to wear, but forget.
3. Caregiver Notifications.  Adult children and other authorized caregivers can receive notifications with text and email messages to let you know your loved one is okay – making myHalo a two-way PERS.  In addition, a private caregiving website is created just for your loved one – so that you can log in anytime from anywhere and make sure your loved one is okay.

Products and services like myHalo are still relatively new and awareness is low.  Reflecting on the 1.5 million PERS users in the United States, I am challenged to ask if this is as high as it could be? Or if the current (and apparently well understood) limitations of PERS are limiting adotpion?  In a 2005 interview with Ronald Feinsteing (former CEO of Lifeline) reported “only 11% of at-home seniors in the U.S. who could benefit from [PERS] service actually have it.” 

If legacy PERS offers benefits to independently living seniors, saves money, and improves quality of life; and PERS 2.0 products like myHalo offer everything legacy PERS offers but adds new benefits at a similar price, then it would seem that these new class of products should be well received and help overcome some of the barriers to PERS.  But the key is in building awareness and educating consumers of the availability of these new products and sevrices.

Tags: Auto PERS, elderly monitoring, medical alarm, PERS, seniors

This entry was posted on Monday, January 11th, 2010 at 12:01 AM and is filed under Halo Blog. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.