What does "effective treatment" mean?

anonfan1432 · Post by **anonfan1432** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 1:45 pm

I see this term thrown all around. What does this mean?
Does this mean your AHI for the entire night is < 5?

if you go here:
wiki/index.php/Apnea_Hypopnea_Index

Less than 5 events (apnea or hypopnea) per hour is considered normal.

does this mean your goal is to get < 5 Ahi for the entire night?

englandsf · Post by **englandsf** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 1:47 pm

Less than 5 is acceptable - less than 1 is what I aim for, less than 2 is what I average.

BlackSpinner · Post by **BlackSpinner** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 1:57 pm

It means as others have said less then 5 AHI and using it when ever you sleep, but also it means how you feel for many people. An AHI of 7 when I first started made a huge positive difference for me the first few moths before I got things dialled in.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:09 pm

alexxshadenk wrote:Does this mean your AHI for the entire night is < 5?

Yes

alexxshadenk wrote:does this mean your goal is to get < 5 Ahi for the entire night

YES

LSAT · Post by **LSAT** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:33 pm

.Effective treatment is more than having an AHI of <5...It means feeling good and getting a good night sleep as well. Having an AHI 0f 2 and feeling crappy is not effective treatment.

Wulfman... · Post by **Wulfman...** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 3:04 pm

"Effective treatment" can mean different things to different people or entities.
To a DME or doctor, it's using the machine for at least 4 hours for 70% of the nights. (most of them don't pay attention to the "data")
To many of us, it's getting: (not necessarily in this order)
a reasonably low AHI,
minimal leakage,
a "sufficient quantity" of sleep (much more than the minimum of 4 hrs.),
comfortable sleep,
feeling rested upon waking,
finding the best/optimal settings (pressure and humidifier),
not waking up too many times during the night,
feeling like there's some "recovery" in our health,
etc.,
etc.,
etc.

Den

.

chunkyfrog · Post by **chunkyfrog** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 3:10 pm

Insurance companies tend to use an entirely different standard, measured entirely on hours of use.
--This supposed to be "effective"?

palerider · Post by **palerider** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 4:33 pm

chunkyfrog wrote:Insurance companies tend to use an entirely different standard, measured entirely on hours of use.
--This supposed to be "effective"?

it's easier than thinking.

like years ago when I was doing phone tech support, and, like so many short sighted places, they focused on how many calls a person would handle in a day... my numbers were usually fairly low, but the people that I worked with had their problems solved, so it didn't generate call backs... we had other techs that had good numbers, but they'd pull shit like "take the case off and call us back"*click*another call!.

so, one day, i decided to play the game, and worked the call back queue as well as taking new calls, lots of "called, left message" and other blowoff techniques... I had over 100 calls that day... pointed that out to my supervisor, and HOW I'd done it, and how I'd pretty much helped NOBODY, but the numbers looked GREAT.... then I went back to my normal thing the next day.

when they formed a second tier support group, mostly with the old timers, they pulled me into it, I had the least time on the job, but I fixed problems. second tier, they didn't track number of calls per day, they tracked problems solved

49er · Post by **49er** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:11 pm

palerider wrote:
chunkyfrog wrote:Insurance companies tend to use an entirely different standard, measured entirely on hours of use.
--This supposed to be "effective"?
it's easier than thinking.

like years ago when I was doing dell phone tech support, and, like so many short sighted places, they focused on how many calls a person would handle in a day... my numbers were usually fairly low, but the people that I worked with had their problems solved, so it didn't generate call backs... we had other techs that had good numbers, but they'd pull shit like "take the case off and call us back"*click*another call!.

so, one day, i decided to play the game, and worked the call back queue as well as taking new calls, lots of "called, left message" and other blowoff techniques... I had over 100 calls that day... pointed that out to my supervisor, and HOW I'd done it, and how I'd pretty much helped NOBODY, but the numbers looked GREAT.... then I went back to my normal thing the next day.

when they formed a second tier support group, mostly with the old timers, they pulled me into it, I had the least time on the job, but I fixed problems. second tier, they didn't track number of calls per day, they tracked problems solved

Sorry for the OT response but I find this story amazing PR. Usually, it seems most situations like this would result in you being fired because you weren't "productive" enough even though you were solving the customer's problems.

palerider · Post by **palerider** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:25 pm

49er wrote:Sorry for the OT response but I find this story amazing PR. Usually, it seems most situations like this would result in you being fired because you weren't "productive" enough even though you were solving the customer's problems.

In so many cases, you're right, but this was early days at that company, and they were still finding their way, and I had a great supervisor (he was the one that got picked to be the manager of the new level 2 support team) and he was savvy enough to buck the 'simple numbers' trend.. especially when he could pull up call records and see that I had a much lower number of repeat calls on the same problem compared to others that had higher 'call numbers'... sure, they had more calls, but they'd also have to call in and wait two, three, four, five times to get a single problem fixed.

now and then you run into clueful management...

Wulfman... · Post by **Wulfman...** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 7:10 pm

palerider wrote:
49er wrote:Sorry for the OT response but I find this story amazing PR. Usually, it seems most situations like this would result in you being fired because you weren't "productive" enough even though you were solving the customer's problems.
In so many cases, you're right, but this was early days at Dell, and they were still finding their way, and I had a great supervisor (he was the one that got picked to be the manager of the new level 2 support team) and he was savvy enough to buck the 'simple numbers' trend.. especially when he could pull up call records and see that I had a much lower number of repeat calls on the same problem compared to others that had higher 'call numbers'... sure, they had more calls, but they'd also have to call in and wait two, three, four, five times to get a single problem fixed.

now and then you run into clueful management...

May I ask what years you worked there?

Den

.

palerider · Post by **palerider** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 7:15 pm

Wulfman... wrote: May I ask what years you worked there?

you can ask ....

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 7:21 pm

Wulfman... wrote:May I ask what years you worked there?

Why not ask what that response has to do with the OPs question - What does "effective treatment" mean?

Wulfman... · Post by **Wulfman...** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 7:28 pm

Guest wrote:
Wulfman... wrote:May I ask what years you worked there?
Why not ask what that response has to do with the OPs question - What does "effective treatment" mean?

I already submitted an "answer" to that question (above). Doesn't matter. I got my answer. Thanks.

Den

.

chunkyfrog · Post by **chunkyfrog** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 7:30 pm

Reading comprehension is a lost art.

What does "effective treatment" mean?

What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?

Re: What does "effective treatment" mean?