CPAPtalk.com

LoQ wrote:

Madalot wrote:I read every post on the first page.

And you did NOT find the following hysterically funny?

One of the forums even had a sleep tech giving advice. Unfortunately, in his posts he calls patients stupid and they don't know anything about sleep medicine. Of course that does not go over very well.

I sense that you might be becoming bitter towards all sleep professionals, and it's slanting the way you read what is written over there. I certainly can understand where you are coming from, but I might just gently suggest that such an emotion is not especially in your best interest, though only you can know whether or not that is true for you.

Yeah, I laughed hard out loud at that. In truth, when I was reading and writing my last post, I was hitting that afternoon time where I get really tired and sick to my stomach and I wrote it quickly. I just woke up from my cat nap. Not sleepy, but still sick to my stomach. Happens every day.

I'm actually not bitter at all. Sorry if I came off that way. In truth, it makes me appreciate sleep professionals, or at least ones that behave appropriately for the most part, all the more. Sometimes you have to see a really bad one to make you appreciate all the rest.

robysue wrote: So I can't help but wonder: Do sleep techs not understand that there is more to correctly using CPAP for the rest of your life than simply having a good titration and an accurate prescription for the pressure settings? Could it possibly be that adjusting to CPAP is actually difficult for many patients because CPAP-use affects many areas of the patient's life, including intimacy? Could it possibly be that there are some nonmedically significant side effects of CPAP therapy that profoundly and negatively affect some patients lives? [Like aerophagia perhaps?] Could it be that we really do need more useful patient education provided to us? Education that goes beyond what seems to be the standard "patient information" provided by the tech and/or doctor:

The fact of the matter is that sleep techs are simply "techs". I do not want to sound uppity - but they are there with a limited education and limited knowledge-base of medicine to work from. They are the "low end" worker bees that carry out the orders of their superiors (who make a lot of money - the owners - that is). Its a job - someone has to do it. In medicine nowadays many of the tasks are farmed out to "inexpensive" workers to produce revenue for the sleep center. They are not physicians, nor have they the scope or training to be physicians. Perhaps if they went to medical school - but they haven't.

When we realize that these people are just small pieces in a very big puzzle, we can move on and realize that they cannot tell us much that is useful. What could you possibly expect from them anyway? Let's get real.

jonquiljo wrote: . . . they cannot tell us much that is useful. . . .

Too broad a statement for me. Many can. Many have. Many do. Many will.

Some bad ones out there? I'm sure. Like any industry.

Mine was extremely helpful to me.

But I agree that the system in the U.S., as it stands, is often that the tech has few, if any, dealings with the patient after titration. That's usually more the doc and RT role. That doesn't mean a good tech has nothing to share. Some amazingly useful stuff has been posted by RPSGTs on this board. A few techs, though, like one recent one I can think of, have stunk up the place a bit. Those usually get bored and move on. Let's hope.

jonquiljo wrote:

The fact of the matter is that sleep techs are simply "techs".

Ah, but you can replace every occurrence of the phrase "sleep tech" in my last post with "sleep doctor" or any other health care worker who works with apnea patients: Seems like many of them don't actually think about what it is like to have to live with CPAP on a daily basis for the rest of your life. Is it any wonder, then, that they tell us that "adjusting won't be a problem"? and when we complain about problems with adjusting that they simply tell us to "try harder"?

My wife's little sister (and her new husband) was so happy to buy a condiminium on a lake with lots of ducks when she was first married. They decorated the place with lots of duck motifs, little duckies sitting all over, and even duckies in the damn car and telling every body they saw about the ducks. It was disgusting to me, but I kept quite knowing what eventually would come.

It took about six months of wading through big greasy puddles of duck doo in the parking lot, on the sidewalks, on the patio, and all over the lawns before they were looking for an agent to sell the place.

jnk wrote:

jonquiljo wrote: . . . they cannot tell us much that is useful. . . .

Too broad a statement for me. Many can. Many have. Many do. Many will.

Some bad ones out there? I'm sure. Like any industry.

Mine was extremely helpful to me.

But I agree that the system in the U.S., as it stands, is often that the tech has few, if any, dealings with the patient after titration. That's usually more the doc and RT role. That doesn't mean a good tech has nothing to share. Some amazingly useful stuff has been posted by RPSGTs on this board. A few techs, though, like one recent one I can think of, have stunk up the place a bit. Those usually get bored and move on. Let's hope.

When our sleep tech was kind enought to give me some basic results of the study, he told me that he was really "not allowed" to be giving me any of this information, he was just supposed to perform the study and a written report would be sent to the prescribing Dr. It is usually the same with any tech performing a test, xray, sonogram,etc. It's the after care that failed us in our case.

Doris..........

You are absolutely right on the role of techs..............techs in all fields can get in BIG legal trouble for even offering their personal opinions.

Indeed, techs are not insured and as a result, can not say anything that might sound like a diagnosis. If you want to get that tech in trouble, tell the hospital the little that the tech DID tell you.

more importantly, techs are not educated to give a diagnosis and provide advice..............

Calist wrote:Indeed, techs are not insured and as a result, can not say anything that might sound like a diagnosis. If you want to get that tech in trouble, tell the hospital the little that the tech DID tell you.

Techs do not have the training to make a diagnosis. I think you need an MD after your name to do that.

rosie

Wasn't it your contention that patients were more than qualified to diagnose themselves?

Completed PhD in sleep research earlier this year. Also worked as a sleep tech.

WB, Split_City. Good to see you posting again.

Calist, I have not been here very long, and I certainly have not read every post, but I do not get the impression that the people here believe that sleep doctors are less qualified than patients to diagnose. Rather, the consensus appears to be that patients can and often should be very proactive and take charge of their care and treatment. That is something else entirely and at the heart of informed consent. You may or may not be aware that, unless a patient is unconscious or incompetent, all doctors are legally obligated to obtain informed consent. The people here who are very proactive and take charge of their care and treatment appear to take informed consent very seriously.

Slinky wrote:WB, Split_City. Good to see you posting again.

Thanks. Yeah, I hven't posted much over the last year as I have been busy with my current project. I'm off to New Zealand next week to present some work at a conference.