The software Philips used (I speak of the time when I was working with their machines) to track was actually quite up-to-speed, however the issue seemed to be the increments to get to peak response were smaller than others (including the response increments of ResMed tracking), so it gave the end result of acting ‘slower’ than other algorithms…for some states of tissue health and particular personal preferences, this is preferred, however for other states of tissue health and personal preferences, a bigger incremental change is preferred. For instance, the smaller incremental changes in Philips algorithms is something I prefer, having tissue damage, as it allows my tissues to adjust to change without effectively compromising the therapeutic outcome (I’m still having gasses exchanged effectively as evidenced by pulse oximetry)….meaning I don’t wake up uncomfortable due to too-quick changes in response (something that becomes more important at higher pressures, ie: AVAPS above 30cm).
Back in the day, I would split machine trials prior to purchase between both ResMed and Philips so patients could feel the different therapeutic responses in their algorithms, and choose which one worked for their comfort levels (tweaking the settings to compensate for each manufacturers nuances as much as I could to suit the patients feedback).
It would be a pleasure to lend a hand with any AVAPS queries; if I don’t catch them as they are posted, please do feel free to send them my way and I’ll do my best to help out!