Purchasing and Using Personal Emergency Response Systems (PERS): how decisions are made by community-dwelling seniors in Canada

BMC Geriatrics

Jan Polgar³  Richard Crilly²  Marita Kloseck¹  Alexandra C. McKenna⁴ 

[1] School of Health Studies, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Western Ontario, HSB 222, Arthur and Sonia Labatt Health Sciences Building, 1151 Richmond Street North, London N6A 5B9, ON, Canada;Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, The University of Western Ontario, Parkwood Hospital, 801 Commissioners Road East, London N6C 5 J1, ON, Canada;School of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, Room 2549, Elborn College, 1201 Western Road, London N6G 1H1, ON, Canada;Graduate Program in Health and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Western Ontario, 1151 Richmond Street North, London N6A 5B9, ON, Canada

关键词: Oldest-old;    Decision-making process;    Grounded theory;    Personal emergency response systems;   

Others  :  1219813
DOI  :  10.1186/s12877-015-0079-z

 received in 2014-02-12, accepted in 2015-06-28,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

As the demographic of older people continues to grow, health services that support independence among community-dwelling seniors have become increasingly important. Personal Emergency Response Systems (PERS) are medical alert systems, designed to serve as a safety net for seniors living alone. Health care professionals often recommend that seniors in danger of falls or other medical emergencies obtain a PERS. The purpose of the study was to investigate the experience of seniors living with and using a PERS in their daily lives, using a qualitative grounded theory approach.

Methods

Five focus groups and 10 semi-structured interviews, with a total of 30 participants, were completed using a grounded theory approach. All participants were PERS subscribers over the age of 80, living alone in a naturally occurring retirement community (NORC) with high health service utilization in a major urban centre in Ontario. Constant comparative analysis was used to develop themes and ultimately a model of why and how seniors obtain and use the PERS.

Results

Two core themes, unpredictability and decision-making around PERS activation, emerged as major features of the theoretical model. Being able to get help and the psychological value of PERS informed the context of living with a PERS.

Conclusions

A number of theoretical conclusions related to unpredictability and the decision-making process around activating PERS were generated.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 McKenna et al.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Dibner AS: Linking frail elderly to the help network. Nurs Homes 1982, 31(6):12-15.
• [2]Redd JL, Zura RD, Tanner AE, Wal EE, Wu MM, Edlic RF: Personal emergency response systems. J Burn Care Rehabil 1992, 13:453-459.
• [3]Dibner AS: Personal emergency response systems: communication technology aids elderly and their families. J Appl Gerontol 1990, 9(4):504-510.
• [4]Levine DA, Tideiksaar R: Personal emergency response systems: factors associated with use among older persons. Mount Sinai J Med 1995, 62(4):293-297.
• [5]Fallis WM, Silverthorne D, Franklin J, McClement S: Client and responder perceptions of a personal emergency response system: Lifeline. Home Health Care Serv Q 2007, 26(3):1-19.
• [6]Mann WC, Belchior P, Tomita MR, Kemp B: Use of personal emergency response systems by older individuals with disabilities. Assist Technol 2005, 17(1):1-18.
• [7]Roush RE, Teasdale TA, Murphy JN, Kirk MS: Impact of a personal emergency response system on hospital utilization by community-residing elders. Southern Med J 1995, 88(9):917-922.
• [8]Roush RE, Teapapsdale TA: Reduced hospitalization rates of two sets of community-residing older adults after use of a personal response system. J Appl Gerontol 1997, 16(3):355-367.
• [9]Lee JS, Hurley MJ, Carew D, Fisher R, Kiss A, Drummond N: A randomized control trial to assess the impact on an emergency response system on anxiety and health care use among older emergency patients after a fall. Acad Emerg Med 2007, 14(4):301-308.
• [10]Porter EJ: Considering the use of a personal emergency response system: An experience of frail, older women. Care Management Journals 2002, 3(4):192-198.
• [11]Porter EJ: Moments of apprehension in the midst of a certainty: some frail older widows’ lives with a personal emergency response system. Qual Health Res 2003, 13(9):1311-1323.
• [12]Porter EJ: Wearing and using personal emergency response system buttons: older frail widows’ intentions. J Gerontol Nurs 2005, 31(10):26-33.
• [13]Corbin J, Strauss A: Basics of Qualitative Research. 3rd edition. Sage Publications, California; 2008.
• [14]Morrow SL: Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology. J Couns Psychol 2005, 52(2):250-260.
• [15]Lincoln YS, Guba EG: Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications, California; 1985.
• [16]Lincoln YS, Guba EG: But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. In Naturalistic Evaluation. Edited by Williams DD. Jossey-Bass, California; 1986:15-25.
• [17]Bostrom M, Bjorklund A, Kjellstrom S, Malmberg B: Personal emergency response system (PERS) alarms may induce insecurity feelings. Gerontechnology 2011, 10(3):s140-145.
• [18]Bostrom M, Kjellstrom S, Bjorklund A: Older persons have ambivalent feelings about the use of monitoring technologies. Tech Disabil 2013, 25:117-125.
• [19]Folkman S, Lazarus RS, Pimley S, Novacek J: Age differences in stress and coping processes. Psychol Aging 1987, 2(2):171-184.
• [20]Phillips B, Zhao H: Predictors of assistive technology abandonment. Assist Technol 1993, 5:36-45.
• [21]Scherer MJ: Outcomes of assistive technology use on quality of life. Disabil Rehabil 1996, 18(9):439-448.
• [22]Wessels R, Dijcks B, Gelderblom GJ, De Witte L: Non-use of provided assistive technology devices: a literature overview. Technol Disabil 2003, 15:231-238.