BACKGROUND: 'Personal Emergency Response Systems' (PERS) can provide a solution for raising the alert after a fall but no criteria are available to enable us to estimate whether a population which is set to benefit from a PERS will be able to use the device.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the profile differences of purchasers and non-purchasers of a PERS and to explore the population of users and non-users of these devices.
METHODS: The study was part of an observational cohort survey of elderly fallers which took place in the emergency department of our University urban hospital.
RESULTS: 413 patients were included. 115 of them were purchasers of a PERS, presented a lower index of independence in daily activities, greater fall history and a tendency to live alone. Only 18 purchasers used their PERS to alert and they were significantly more likely to live alone, showed a trend to be younger and less demented. This subgroup spent less time on the ground and with a lower 6-months mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: The subjects who had and had not purchased a PERS presented no significant differences in terms of time on the ground or consequences. However it was more relevant to focus on the users and non-users of those PERS to isolate a frailer population. Indeed the consequences of falls were more devastating in the group of purchasers who had not used their device to alert. This group may benefit the most from new generations of PERS which do not require control by the subject.