ResMed S9 coming soon?

DaveMunson wrote:You need wave guide and a magnetron (at least a klystron or travelling wave tube) to complete the circuit along with a larger flux capacitor load otherwise you will never dissipate 1.21 gigawatts of power. Unless you eat a burrito. If you eat a burrito, you will be able to dissipate, but the vent tube is plugged into the wrong hole.

Hmmm, I was thinking that the waveguide was goig to the wrong place ? -:)

Actually a YAGI might be better suited (at the end of the waveguide convertor).
If we can get the low atmospheric bounce angle right who knows how far we can
take this

DSM

PS Timbalionguy - glad that updated patent did the trick

D

Oooopps my humblest apologies - how could I get microwave signals soooo mixed up with bounced shortwave

This is a remarkable thread. Sincere thanks to everyone contributing knowledge, and especially timbalionguy.

I find myself wondering how much the S9 has to offer in its non-Autoset version. All this clever FOT analysis will be wasted.

Ms.Snuffleupagus wrote:

rested gal wrote:Thanks robmax.

And here it is in English at their UK site:

http://www.resmed.com/uk/products/s9_se ... nc=dealers

I just noticed that I can't open this link. It says that based on my location, I am unable to access this site and redirects me to the Canada/US Resmed site. I was able to view the UK site when Rested Gal first posted it.
Hummmm...

This URL gets me into what I think is the same site without kicking me out for being in North America:

http://www.s9morecomfort.com/s9morecomfort/en_gb/

PST wrote:This is a remarkable thread. Sincere thanks to everyone contributing knowledge, and especially timbalionguy.

I find myself wondering how much the S9 has to offer in its non-Autoset version. All this clever FOT analysis will be wasted.

Ms.Snuffleupagus wrote:

rested gal wrote:Thanks robmax.

And here it is in English at their UK site:

http://www.resmed.com/uk/products/s9_se ... nc=dealers

I just noticed that I can't open this link. It says that based on my location, I am unable to access this site and redirects me to the Canada/US Resmed site. I was able to view the UK site when Rested Gal first posted it.
Hummmm...

This URL gets me into what I think is the same site without kicking me out for being in North America:

http://www.s9morecomfort.com/s9morecomfort/en_gb/

PST

Someone else can correct me if I am wrong, but I see in the datasheets that the S9 Elite provides a Central Apnea Index in its data output.

The only way it can do that is by using the FOT technique. I am also sure I read elsewhere that the CSA data is available on *all* S9 models.

The main difference with the Autoset is the self adjusting pressure.

Cheers

DSM

-2 Just want to add that the reason the CSA Index is so important is that whether you have a cpap or an auto the data that helps your RT decide if you have the right machine and that your SDB has been properly identified, needs to be gathered & available from all the models.

Silly question. Is the S9 going to come out with a bipap version or just auto cpap?

DaveMunson wrote:Silly question. Is the S9 going to come out with a bipap version or just auto cpap?

Dave, I don't know for sure but if I was asked to bet on it happening I would wager a very large amount and take any odds.

What would we expect to see ? (my guessing)

1) A new Vpap Auto that includes FOT sensing

2) Perhaps further down the track, a new machine that is like a cut down (smaller) version of the Vpap Adapt SV, that includes an auto adjusting epap (EEP), FOT sensing, SV algorithm & perhaps no proximal pressure sensing line to the mask (the 2nd tube than measures pressure at the mask). If such a machine came along, I would also speculate it would likely require specific masks that work with it.

Again, pure speculation based on current trends.

DSM

An 8 foot heated hose would be on my wish list, unfortunately it looks like just a 6 foot one is available

GaryG wrote:

rested gal wrote:

carbonman wrote:Is the S9 going to need another version of software??

From the Specifications page:
SOFTWARE COMPATIBILITY
ResScan 3.10

I'm assuming 3.10 is not 3.1 (a back version from the 3.7 many of us have), but 3.10 is an upgraded version of 3.7.

Poor numbering scheme. Shoulda called it 4.0.

I LOVE that "by, OR ON THE ORDER OF, a physician". Yet how many local DME providers will NOT honor a doctor's script for the software. Really, those who got a script for the software from the doctor should have a xerox of that statement to hand to the local DME provider along w/the script - just to have the pleasure of shoving them under the provider's nose - then waltz off and buy it online for what? 1/3 the price?

The estimated events from home machines are for trending purposes. If turning up pressure makes my AHI consistently lower, why would I care whether my airway happened to be open or happened to be closed during the events? As long as I can prove there are fewer events, I'm happy--so how is the info for differentiating centrals of any use to me, even if it is right?

A few docs may be fooled into thinking lab diagnostics and titrations are no longer necessary if home machines can differentiate obstructives from centrals. I think it an important point that home machines may TRY to differentiate, but that doesn't prove they are any good at it yet. They way I use data, it doesn't need to be. But if FOT is going to be used as a further excuse for skipping lab titrations, I think serious research needs to lock down the exact accuracy of home-machine differentiation first. Has that been done in practice, or just theory?

jnk wrote:The estimated events from home machines are for trending purposes. If turning up pressure makes my AHI consistently lower, why would I care whether my airway happened to be open or happened to be closed during the events? As long as I can prove there are fewer events, I'm happy--so how is the info for differentiating centrals of any use to me, even if it is right?

A few docs may be fooled into thinking lab diagnostics and titrations are no longer necessary if home machines can differentiate obstructives from centrals. I think it an important point that home machines may TRY to differentiate, but that doesn't prove they are any good at it yet. They way I use data, it doesn't need to be. But if FOT is going to be used as a further excuse for skipping lab titrations, I think serious research needs to lock down the exact accuracy of home-machine differentiation first. Has that been done in practice, or just theory?

JNK
The point re home titration is that last month the CEO of Resmed in a published address stated that 2010 would be the year of home titration. I summarized his points in a post here the same day. IIRC his comments were along the lines that clinics were overloaded & holding back access to the therapy.

Apart from his obvious vested interest in the market speeding up, I believe home assessment and therapy tuning will become the norm. Maybe in 12010 but maybe in 2011. Seems to me it will come.

DSM

Sorry for not getting the patent analysis done this weekend. On my only free night, everybody and their brother called me and wanted to chew my ear off. Ran the battery down in both wireless phones and the cell phone Of course, I was uber-busy this evening with monthly transmitter site inspections, and not a single soul called me.....)

Maybe tomorrow night!

timbalionguy wrote:Sorry for not getting the patent analysis done this weekend. On my only free night, everybody and their brother called me and wanted to chew my ear off. Ran the battery down in both wireless phones and the cell phone Of course, I was uber-busy this evening with monthly transmitter site inspections, and not a single soul called me.....)

Maybe tomorrow night!

Timbalionguy

Please take all the time you want - the answer(s) will not hold anyone back I promise
You are already earning legend status for having worked out what you did

Anything you come up with now will be icing on the cake & I can promise that from this condor
to a clever lion, there is already great respect & time is not an issue

DSM

PS I have another patent I'd like you to look at when ( you are free)
All about PaCO2 monitoring using and SV machine.

jnk wrote:The estimated events from home machines are for trending purposes. If turning up pressure makes my AHI consistently lower, why would I care whether my airway happened to be open or happened to be closed during the events? As long as I can prove there are fewer events, I'm happy--so how is the info for differentiating centrals of any use to me, even if it is right?

A few docs may be fooled into thinking lab diagnostics and titrations are no longer necessary if home machines can differentiate obstructives from centrals. I think it an important point that home machines may TRY to differentiate, but that doesn't prove they are any good at it yet. They way I use data, it doesn't need to be. But if FOT is going to be used as a further excuse for skipping lab titrations, I think serious research needs to lock down the exact accuracy of home-machine differentiation first. Has that been done in practice, or just theory?

JNK

I got to thinking about the unusual tone of your post - it kept floating into my mind a lot & then the lights went on ...

Are you working in a sleep clinc ?

Just a strong hunch from someone who doesn't know nor did

Cheers

DSM

dsm wrote: . . . Are you working in a sleep clinc ? . . .

Nope. But I am very grateful I got my titration at a lab. The tech had to switch over to bilevel part way through. That would have been very difficult for him to do if he hadn't been there.

I don't mind docs diagnosing without an NPSG and with home data if that helps the doc diagnose. But it is my opinion that a manned in-lab titration serves a purpose that cannot be well served at home. I still believe in self-titration over the long term, but AFTER a lab titration to screen for other sleep abnormalities and to document the reaction to pressure and the type of treatment needed. That meets my personal definition of good-quality care. Give everyone an auto, and you stop many unneeded repeat titrations. I believe that approach would increase capacity at present labs well over 50%.

jeff

timbalionguy wrote:Sorry for not getting the patent analysis done this weekend. On my only free night, everybody and their brother called me and wanted to chew my ear off. Ran the battery down in both wireless phones and the cell phone Of course, I was uber-busy this evening with monthly transmitter site inspections, and not a single soul called me.....)

Maybe tomorrow night!

No rush, TLG! I suspect that kind of analysis is a pure pleasure activity for you. If it is, consider saving it as a special treat when you can ENJOY it----rather than hastily getting to it as if it were a pressing assignment.

I just took a peek back through this thread to see the full-version of patent text has been removed to save clutter. That makes sense. There might be others who would also enjoy looking through the patent. So here it is without thread clutter: http://www.patentstorm.us/applications/ ... ltext.html

Patent description workers and lurkers alike, enjoy! Thanks again, TLG, for your wonderful work.