Resmed S8 II

JATaylor wrote: ... I'm just addressing an underlying theme that is easily seen (even if it may be unconscious on the part of ResMed). Having read enough of this type of literature, and knowing how difficult patients can be at times, it's easy to get into the mindset that work needs to be done on behalf of the patient, because they won't make the effort themselves (many won't, but some will).

However, this kind of thinking subtly invades the medical profession, and creates an environment that's not conducive to patient participation in their own health care. ...

However, having said that, I still think we can send subtle messages that can affect a professional culture (I do the same myself many times).

I was looking with a critical eye at the subtle message that can be conveyed, and ultimately affect patient care.

That's part of what I do in my professional capacity, and as I explained to DSM, my personal soapbox.

Most of us can read that brochure without making such assumptions, but why not improve it if we can. It could be a matter of subtle adjustments with wording such as:

Focus your efforts on those patients who require immediate intervention.


ResTraxx Wireless: unmatched benefits

* Simplify data capture—no need for phone lines, modems, cards and readers; ease the burden on patients for data transfer.
* Improve staff efficiencies—reduced patient and physician phone calls; no need for reminder calls or home visits to retrieve data.

EXCELLENT point, JA!! I can't argue w/that logic at all. That condescending attitude by the medical profession is one I've resented and fought most of my life.

Further 0.2c worth re use of ResTraxx.

On the point RG made re few RTs actually being proactive, yes I'm inclined to agree - more though in a situation where ResTraxx units are given to patients in the belief that their 'trusty hard working' RT is going to be monitoring them like a hawk, on an ongoing basis - I too doubt that would really happen.

But if the ResTraxx is used in sleep clinics or where an RT has a specific need to gather data from a patient under investigation, the ResTraxx is a very effective tool.

Re JA's point about brochures & the sensitivity of their wording - fair point.


I am sure this type of device will become pretty common. Part of my job as an IT architect is too investigate Mobility computing for my supply-chain employer & we are shifting to the use of notebook computers with highspeed 3G/4G cards as the way of the future. These new wireless networks are incredibly fast - the newest national network here in Aust boasts 7.2 megabits/sec. I can today routinely demo dowloads of 250 KiloBytes (= 2megabits) per sec.

Wireless data transfer - WiFi WiMax 3G 4G are where we are heading.

DSM

rested gal wrote:

Slinky wrote:I took those quotes differently, JATaylor. The way it struck me was instead of following up w/each and every patient at set intervals --- <snipped>

Interesting, the different takes on the advertising blurb.

My take is that even if a few DMEs buy it, I doubt that it will ever be used by any of them for much more than documenting "hours of use." And even then, only if an insurance company asks for "proof." . . .

In my opinion it will end up being used as no more than just another way to take a glance at compliance. And maybe glancing at the 95th centile pressure when an autopap titration trial was ordered.

Patient calling in by phone with a complaint or problem will still be the attention-getter...insofar as either of those things happen -- patient calling, or getting their attention -- imho.

Slinky wrote:Ahhh, but I'm not so sure that DME's are the primary market that they were trying to reach. You've painted a vivid picture of my sheister CPAP DME, RestedGal. - BUT - my sleep lab is an entirely different matter. I "can" see my sleep lab eventually employing the use of ResTraxx.

This has been an interesting discussion.

Thanks for the input everyone (especially DSM, Slinky, and Rested Gal).

My guess is it all still boils down to how responsible, reliable, and trustworthy the clinicians are who make use of this tool.

And ultimately, it's up to us. If we can't trust those responsible for helping us with this treatment, then we need to find someone we can trust (along with educating ourselves).

You can kick my soapbox now.

Slinky wrote:I can't argue w/that logic at all.

I can! It's just yet another example of poltical correctness rather than calling things for the way they really are!

Cheers,

Bill

billbolton wrote:

Slinky wrote:I can't argue w/that logic at all.

I can! It's just yet another example of poltical correctness rather than calling things for the way they really are!

Cheers,

Bill

Bill,

I disagree on that one. I'm not known for my political correctness, and this isn't an example. From a practical standpoint, if we can avoid offending a segment of the population, without compromising ourselves or our values, why not do it?

And from a capitalistic point of view, even if our customer base is the local clinician, why offend the patients they serve (or help create an environment that moves toward that direction)? That can't be good for their customer base in the long run.

My motto is simply: "Don't offend if you don't need to, be willing to offend if you must." My reasons for the "soapbox" are very practical, and those who know me well would actually find it humorous that you consider my thinking "politically correct." Some of them might even say they're ideas are rubbing off on me.

Now, I'd like to announce my candidacy for President.

Like Slinky said, somebody's gonna kick my soapbox.

Glad you only gave it a short kick .

Eh, BillBolton, here in the states that condescending attitude to patients has been around LONG before "politictal correctness" became a catch phrase. H*ll, back in the 60's HEAVEN FORBID the patient should see or know their blood pressure, pulse rate or temperature!!! "They" wouldn't "understand". Gads! I used to get the urge to haul off and swat those doctors and nurses!