Our medical alert system testing methodology

Staying safe and connected is crucial, especially for seniors, individuals with health issues, or those living alone. Medical alert devices provide a lifeline in emergencies, offering immediate access to assistance at the push of a button. With various options available, choosing the right device is paramount for ensuring safety and peace of mind.

Our meticulous review process incorporates hands-on testing and insights from healthcare professionals to evaluate everything from reliability and ease of use to wearability and emergency response effectiveness.

Whether you’re looking for a medical alert system with fall detection, GPS tracking, or a simple home-based system, we’re committed to helping you find the best solution. These devices are more than just technology—they’re integral to maintaining independence and security.

Here’s why you can trust our medical alert system reviews.

Every Fortune medical alert system review features:

Physical product testing with custom images as proof.
Authors who are credentialed health writers.
Fact-checking and reviewing by qualified experts, such as emergency medicine doctors, gerontologists, and home safety experts.
Medical reviewing by industry experts.
Claims backed by trustworthy clinical research.

Fortune Recommends™ aims to test 100% of the medical alert systems we recommend so we can provide genuine, unbiased feedback.

Occasionally, we may highlight devices we haven’t personally tested yet. In these cases, we depend on our team of healthcare and safety professionals to perform extensive research. We update our reviews after thoroughly testing these devices, providing insights into their long-term reliability and effectiveness.

Though we earn commission through affiliate links and sometimes receive free products for editorial consideration, our opinions remain our own. Not every tested product makes it into our published reviews. We focus on devices that meet our stringent criteria for safety, reliability, and user convenience.

Learn how we test all product categories here.

Our scoring methodology for medical alert systems

We assign each product a score of one through five for each of the 16 categories we test. Rather than simply average those scores together, we weigh them based on what’s most important. We then average them to create a cumulative score.

For example, evaluating the device’s battery life is critical because the battery directly affects its reliability in emergency situations. Although important for user satisfaction, features like the design or color have less impact on the device’s primary function of ensuring safety.

Using these individual scores, we create an overall score on a scale of one out of five. A score of five is the highest possible rating, and one is the lowest.

Testing criteria

Reliability and response—40%

When it comes to medical alert systems, this category is the cornerstone of our evaluation process. When an individual finds themselves in an emergency—whether due to a fall, medical issue, or another urgent need for assistance—the reliability of their medical alert device becomes crucial. We assess the device’s capacity to perform its most critical function: provide a dependable and swift connection to help when it’s needed the most.

Here’s what we look for:

Response time: This factor quantifies the duration from when the user initiates an alert (by pressing a button or through automatic detection, such as fall detection) to when connected to a response center or emergency services. Our testers evaluate the response time under various conditions, whether day or night, irrespective of the user’s location. They also evaluate the time it takes for the device to recognize an alert has been triggered and how long it takes to initiate communication with the response center.
Signal range: This defines the maximum distance between the wearable alert device (like a pendant or wristband) and the base unit that the system can effectively operate. This range directly impacts the device’s ability to communicate an emergency signal anywhere within the user’s living environment. When evaluating signal range, our testers consider coverage area; obstacle penetration, such as walls and furniture; signal stability; environmental factors (like heavy electronic equipment); and adaptability.
Battery life: This factor directly impacts the device’s ability to provide continuous, reliable service. A device with a long battery life ensures that users remain protected without frequent charges, which is especially important during emergencies when the device must function flawlessly. Our testers evaluate how long the device can run on a single charge or with a fresh battery under normal usage conditions. Battery life can also vary based on usage patterns, such as alert frequency or additional features, like fall detection and GPS tracking. We test various scenarios to understand how these variables affect battery life. Our testers also evaluate the clarity of low battery alerts, charging convenience, backup power solutions, and the battery replacement process.
Water resistance: Falls and emergencies often occur in areas with high moisture levels, such as bathrooms and kitchens. This factor assesses a device’s ability to function effectively even when exposed to water, ensuring it remains operational in situations where it’s most needed. Our testers evaluate the IP rating, which provides a standardized measure of the device’s resistance to water and dust. The higher the IP rating, the greater the protection against water intrusion. We also examine the durability in wet conditions by either submerging waterproof devices or exposing water-resistant devices to splashes or sprays to simulate real-life scenarios, such as taking a shower or washing hands. Our testers also examine the emergency button functionality when wet and the maintenance and care procedures required after a device is exposed to water.
Fall detection: This feature uses sensors to detect the occurrence of a fall and automatically triggers an alert to the response center when the user can’t manually press the emergency button. The primary concern with this technology is its ability to accurately distinguish between a real fall and other types of motion that may mimic a fall, like sitting down. Our testers simulate various scenarios to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the device’s fall detection, aiming to minimize false alarms while ensuring genuine falls are reliably detected. They also evaluate the speed of alert transmission to the response center, user notification and cancellation option, battery life impact, and the emergency response protocol once a fall is detected and an alert is issued.

Ease of use and accessibility—30%

This category is fundamental to our evaluation of medical alert systems because it directly impacts users’ ability to effectively leverage the technology in their daily lives, especially during emergencies. It scrutinizes how user-friendly and accessible the medical alert systems are, considering that the primary users often include seniors, individuals with disabilities, or those with limited technological proficiency. The goal is to ensure all users can easily operate the devices, regardless of their physical abilities or familiarity with technology. We evaluate:

Wearability: This factor directly influences medical alert systems’ effectiveness and user satisfaction. Wear is essential for ensuring the device is always accessible in an emergency. Our testers assess how comfortably and unobtrusively a device can be worn throughout the day and night. They also consider the size and weight of the device, the ease of use, design, and durability.
Voice clarity and volume: Our testers assess the audio performance of medical alert systems, especially those that facilitate two-way communication between the user and the response center. In an emergency, clear and effective communication can significantly impact the response time and the quality of assistance provided. Users must be able to hear and be heard by the operator without straining, regardless of their environment or potential hearing impairment. Our testers evaluate the audio quality, volume levels, speaker and microphone performance, hands-free operation, and feedback mechanisms, such as confirmations of button presses or alerts being sent.
Setup and use: This factor influences a user’s initial and ongoing interaction with the system. Straightforward setup and intuitive daily use are essential to benefit from the system quickly. Our testers assess how easy it is for a new user to activate and configure their medical alert system immediately. This includes the clarity of instructions, the simplicity of installation, and the process of testing the system to ensure it’s operational. The testers also evaluate the systems for the intuitiveness of buttons, screens, or voice commands and the flexibility in adjusting settings to meet individual needs.
Accessibility features: This factor is integral to assessing how well the medical alert system caters to the varied needs of all potential users, including those with disabilities or age-related limitations. These features are designed to make these devices usable and beneficial to a wider audience. They ensure everyone can maintain their independence and safety, regardless of physical, sensory, or cognitive limitations. Our testers evaluate visual aids for users with visual impairments, such as large, high-contrast buttons and displays and auditory cues that confirm actions (like pressing the help button). They also evaluate whether the devices accommodate users with hearing impairments through adjustable volume settings or two-way communication features. For individuals with limited dexterity, our reviewers assess the devices for a tactile design, such as textured grips or wearable options.

Value—20%

This category embodies an assessment beyond cost comparison to encompass a medical alert system’s overall worth and effectiveness in safeguarding the user’s health and independence. Value is not solely quantified in terms of price, but also in the quality, reliability, and range of features a device offers relative to its cost. Moreover, it examines the transparency and fairness of pricing models, considering any subscription fees, add-on services, service agreements, and more.

We evaluate:

Initial cost vs. ongoing fees: This factor helps evaluate the financial implications of acquiring and using a medical alert system over time. Our testers evaluate the initial cost, including the device’s purchase price and any additional equipment required for its operation. Then, they evaluate any ongoing fees. Many medical alert systems require a subscription for continuous monitoring services, which can significantly impact the cost over time. These fees can vary widely depending on the level of service chosen. We evaluate the clarity and fairness of these models, looking for transparent pricing without hidden costs.
Contract flexibility: Our testers assess the terms and conditions of using a medical alert system, particularly focusing on the service agreement’s length, cancellation policies, and any fees associated with altering the service.
Included features vs. add-ons: This factor helps distinguish between the core functionalities provided at the base price and those available for an additional fee. It’s essential for users to know which features are inherent to the device’s operation for emergency response and which features enhance the device’s utility—but at an extra cost. Our testers evaluate the features available in the base price of the device, focusing on those critical for ensuring the user’s safety and the device’s primary function. They also evaluate advanced features like fall detection, GPS tracking, fitness tracking, medication reminders, and more.
Insurance: Our testers examine the potential for insurance policies, including Medicare, Medicaid, or private insurance, to cover the cost of the device or its associated services. This consideration is important for many users, especially those on fixed incomes or with limited financial flexibility. Insurance coverage can substantially offset the costs of acquiring and maintaining a medical alert system, enhancing its value proposition.

Customer experience—10%

This is a crucial aspect of our evaluation process for medical alert systems. It focuses on the interactions and support users receive when purchasing a device for its daily use and any required customer service. The significance of customer experience can’t be overstated. It directly influences user satisfaction, trust in the medical alert system, and, by extension, the user’s willingness to rely on the device for their safety and well-being.

Our factors in this rating include:

Shipping: Our testers evaluate the efficiency, cost, and convenience of how the device is delivered to the user, as these elements can significantly impact the initial impression and satisfaction with the chosen provider. Prompt and reliable shipping is especially critical in this market, where the device’s timely arrival can be crucial for users who need the safety and peace of mind that medical alert systems provide.
Warranty: A comprehensive and fair warranty protects users against defects and malfunctions and reflects the manufacturer’s trust in the durability and reliability of their devices. This aspect of customer experience is particularly important, as it reassures users that their investment is safeguarded and they can rely on continuous support and service for their safety devices. Our testers evaluate the coverage terms, ease of claiming warranty, replacement and repair policies, transparency and communication, and extended warranty options.
Customer support: Our testers examine the hours of operation and the availability of customer support for non-emergency questions, troubleshooting, and regular inquiries, prioritizing companies that offer 24/7 assistance to accommodate questions at any time. They also evaluate how users can reach customer support, including phone, email, live chat, and social media. Response time, quality of assistance, user education and resources, and feedback mechanism are also all evaluated by our testers.