[CPAP] APAP replacement

[calvin23]

Hello to everyone. It has been ten years since I started using some form of CPAP equipement and eventually became a ResMed Autoset user. Then I had lots of people say no to Autotitration. I just ordered a S9 autoset today and I am somewhat excited about the new features.

In the begining it took three months to get use to a CPAP but I have use it evernite since. I can not sleep without it. Bottom line is that you must be comfortable with what you are using or you won't use it. That is why I use autotitration. It changes to what you need and not to what some of the experts think. I will be back looking for resscan when I get the machine.

[trish6hundred]

Hi calvin23,
WELCOME! to the forum.!
GREAT machine, I'm sure happy with my S9Autoset.

[zonk]

I just ordered a S9 autoset today and I am somewhat excited about the new features.

congrats
S9 manual available by email. scroll down to bottom of the page
http://www.apneaboard.com/adjust-cpap-pr...tup-manual

S9 setup with pictures and video
http://www.apneaboard.com/resmed-s9-cpap-setup

[PaulaO2]

You can also use SleepyHead. I tried both and prefer SH.

Zonk prefers ResScan. But he's weird.

[zonk]

say it often enough and might start believing

[yroseotex]

Let me preface by saying I am a sleep professional as well as CPAP user. I have a PhD and I tend to analyze, well everything. When I see posts extolling the benefits of autoPAP and none of the caveats, I become concerned. All the auto machines rely on information they get from you through your mask. If you are not using one of the masks specifically recommended by your machine maker, your machine may be receiving false information that it then uses to determine the need for pressure changes. Most of the auto machines rely on an average or spot check of your breathing. That means you continue to have OSA to some extent, how much depends a lot on the variability of your breathing which in turn may vary due to position and/or sleep stage. If you do not have a sleep physician or respiratory therapist regularly review the data from your machine you may still be at an increased risk for heart attack, stroke, metabolic syndrome etc. Most of the "scientific" literature regarding the efficacy of autoPAP compared to CPAP rely on very low subject numbers, often less than 50. Do you really want to subject your health to information that is limited to what happens with a small number of people. Also, most research limits their study subjects to those that do not have many of the co-morbidities you see with sleep apnea. If you suffer from one of those then the machine you are using has not been verified to successfully treat your OSA.

[zonk]

If you are not using one of the masks specifically recommended by your machine maker, your machine may be receiving false information that it then uses to determine the need for pressure changes. .

only apply to phillips Repironcis machines as different masks have different system one resistance setting


also its been suggested "0" for non-Respironcis masks

Resmed S9, you have to select the type of mask that you,re using (nasal pillows, nasal, or full face) as different masks have different vents leaks rates so the S9 calculate unintentional leak while PRS1 report total leak


how about some citation to the scientific literature

people with comorbidity more likely would not be on cpap/apap or around here
more likely under the care of their physician

[PaulaO2]

Let me preface by saying I am a sleep professional as well as CPAP user. I have a PhD and I tend to analyze, well everything. When I see posts extolling the benefits of autoPAP and none of the caveats, I become concerned. All the auto machines rely on information they get from you through your mask. If you are not using one of the masks specifically recommended by your machine maker, your machine may be receiving false information that it then uses to determine the need for pressure changes.

Um, I've never had a machine manual tell me I must use X mask for proper treatment. Some machine makers, like Zonk pointed out, say there are some specific settings, but I think that's poor design. And it only covers their own masks which makes me not believe them.

Most of the auto machines rely on an average or spot check of your breathing. That means you continue to have OSA to some extent, how much depends a lot on the variability of your breathing which in turn may vary due to position and/or sleep stage.

Not sure exactly what you are saying except that body position and the like can vary the events. That's a given and we all know that.

If you do not have a sleep physician or respiratory therapist regularly review the data from your machine you may still be at an increased risk for heart attack, stroke, metabolic syndrome etc. Most of the "scientific" literature regarding the efficacy of autoPAP compared to CPAP rely on very low subject numbers, often less than 50. Do you really want to subject your health to information that is limited to what happens with a small number of people. Also, most research limits their study subjects to those that do not have many of the co-morbidities you see with sleep apnea. If you suffer from one of those then the machine you are using has not been verified to successfully treat your OSA.

Sorry, I don't agree with the above because it is all based on that first part of that first sentence: If you do not have a sleep physician or respiratory therapist regularly review the data from your machine. If this were true, if this were so dang important to the docs, if this were the only thing between me and all the physical disasters you and others mention, then why don't we all have data capable machines? I never have until I bought my own. So if the great and mighty "scientific" literature is so hell bent on being anti-AutoPAP, then why don't we all have data capable machines to gather data to prove or disprove this?

How would they "verify" a non-data capable machine? How can they tell me if my treatment is or is not working? The only way my doc has ever made any changes was based on a guess and later from a single night's worth of oximeter data. Nothing else. I can bet well over half of the folks here can give very similar stories.

Until we all have data capable machines, any argument from folks like you about the Evil AutoPAPs is just a waste of good air.

Don't belittle our intelligence by using scare tactics. They don't work on this forum.

[Sleepster]

If you are not using one of the masks specifically recommended by your machine maker, your machine may be receiving false information that it then uses to determine the need for pressure changes. .

only apply to phillips Repironcis machines as different masks have different system one resistance setting

But even in the case of the Phillips Respironics machines that System One Resistance setting merely lowers the pressure by a fraction of a centimeter. If you're worried about it you can always find a mask made by Respironics that has a similar resistance to the flow of air as your mask and use that that setting. For example, a small nasal pillow will have a resistance setting of X4 regardless of who makes it.

[Sleepster]

If you do not have a sleep physician or respiratory therapist regularly review the data from your machine you may still be at an increased risk for heart attack, stroke, metabolic syndrome etc.

Then why are sleep physicians and respiratory therapists setting up new patients with CPAP machines that don't collect data?

Are these professionals exposing their patients to an increased risk for heart attack, stroke, metabolic syndrome etc. ?

This is why Apnea Board promotes patient empowerment. We are the patients and we want to reduce these risks by making sure that people understand the benefits of data-capable machines.

No one here is claiming that APAP's can substitute for competent medical providers. They are definitely part of the equation, though, as are a number of other factors that are much more important. First and foremost you have to get your leaks under control. Unless and until you do that the other data that's collected is worthless and the therapy is ineffective.