Page 2 of 5

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2016 9:18 pm
by palerider
chunkyfrog wrote:A great deal of what avi says can be harmful; or are you unable to READ?
I think it's more that they just don't give a shit about anybodies welfare, but get their jollies being an ass towards me...

takes all kinds, I suppose...

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2016 9:19 pm
by Lucyhere
chunkyfrog wrote:A great deal of what avi says can be harmful; or are you unable to READ?


Okay... if he says something harmful, of course something should be said The majority of Avi's posts are suggestions or his opinion, and pr doesn't need to follow him all around the forum attacking him.

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2016 9:23 pm
by Lucyhere
palerider wrote:... don't give a shit about anybodies welfare,...
palerider, you should take a long, hard look in the mirror. Maybe if you look long enough, the mirror will tell you why you are such a nasty, "deplorable" person.

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:51 pm
by yaconsult
To get back to the original question, yes there are reasons to fine tune the auto settings. Once you know what pressures you typically need, it often works best to raise the minimum to that pressure. Why? Because the machines are designed to make changes gradually so as to not disturb the sleeper. During this adjustment period, the sleeper will have more events than is necessary. In my case, I have my minimum set to 13 and my max at 20 and that's what works best for me. If I started at 4 or 5, I would have many more arousals and events until the auto algorithm slowly adjusted the pressure up to 13.

Unfortunately, some doctors and DMEs think that the machines can work effectively when left wide open - 4 to 20. But better results are often received with some fine tuning.

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:13 am
by palerider
yaconsult wrote: If I started at 4 or 5, I would have many more arousals and events until the auto algorithm slowly adjusted the pressure up to 13.
and even more when the machine tried to get the pressure back down to the minimum you set.

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:11 am
by Holden4th
If you are in hospital with heart issues then using CPAP is not very likely as you will be hooked up to oxygen and be sleeping semi-upright. When I was there during my triple bypass they wouldn't let me sleep horizontally. I was also hooked up to all sorts of equipment including the oximeter on my index finger. Any drop in O2 levels would have had a nurse into my room very quickly.

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:32 pm
by chunkyfrog
When I was in the hospital after my cancer surgery last year, the
Respiratory tech who set up the hospital's s9 Autoset for me used my AUTO settings,
which I had on an image on my phone. There was no effort to make me use any other settings.

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:36 pm
by avi123
When AutoPAP Doesn't Fit the Bill

Patients with congestive heart failure may not be candidates for autoPAP. Many times, their apnea is more complex with Cheyne-Stokes respirations and advanced devices are required. Patients with COPD may not tolerate autoPAP as they are at risk for hyperinflation. Those with central sleep apnea should not use autoPAP as well as it may not treat their apnea. Patients with obesity hypoventilation, neuromuscular weakness and restrictive lung disease are not recommended to try autoPAP due to ventilation issues. More advanced devices are recommended for them as well.

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:37 pm
by Uncle_Bob
chunkyfrog wrote:A great deal of what avi says can be harmful; or are you unable to READ?

There are NO doctors here

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:39 pm
by Uncle_Bob
palerider wrote: takes all kinds, I suppose...

I think he may have finally gotten it

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:48 pm
by Uncle_Bob
My sleep doctor used to argue that APAP was not desirable because it needed an event to happen before the algorithm/machine got a chance to react. And that the waiting and resulting action was disruptive to sleep.
I still got his DME to get me an APAP though
I use APAP every now and again to kind simulate the sleep lab and see if I need to adjust my CPAP pressure which I then use on a nightly basis.

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 8:16 pm
by chunkyfrog
I suppose avi means well; but it would help if he were more rational--like he used to be.

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 8:20 pm
by LSAT
Lucyhere wrote:
palerider wrote:... don't give a shit about anybodies welfare,...
palerider, you should take a long, hard look in the mirror. Maybe if you look long enough, the mirror will tell you why you are such a nasty, "deplorable" person.
The mirror would most likely break....

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:25 pm
by palerider
LSAT wrote:
noise wrote:
palerider wrote:... don't give a shit about anybodies welfare,...
palerider, you should take a long, hard look in the mirror. Maybe if you look long enough, the mirror will tell you why you are such a nasty, "deplorable" person.
The mirror would most likely break....
what're you talking about? I cast no reflection!

Re: Is there any reason NOT to be on "auto?"

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:27 pm
by Uncle_Bob
chunkyfrog wrote:I suppose avi means well; but it would help if he were more rational--like he used to be.
cpapTALK.com

Maybe people can just take what they want here with a pinch of salt