Hello Guest, Welcome to Apnea Board !
As a guest, you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use.
To post a message, you must create a free account using a valid email address.

or Create an Account


New Posts   Today's Posts

Online version of sleepyhead
#21
(03-10-2017, 08:49 AM)C0mbe Wrote: I suspect that a third party cannot access the health data because of strict privacy laws, but that the actual patient can do with it what they please.

as long as the 3rd party doesn't process this data that's true - but normally that's what you do if you store it online and have access (as the provider) to it. It's possible to process that kind of data - but than there can be no way that the results of that process can be linked back to one idividual.

EDIT: my last edit in the post before this came AFTER your post. - sorry
Post Reply Post Reply
#22
sleeprider: that's true
QT is portable - even to mobile-devices ... to what degree the actually code is portable is not that important - the more pressing matter would be: user-interface-design. that would need a complete redesign for mobile devices - on phones I seriously doubt that anything meaningful besides statistics can be presented on such a small screen. (and than there is the question to what degree these informations differ to the ones presented on the machine itself) tablet might and should be the lower boundary.

One would have to see what's lurking around the corner - ResMed is going in an interesting direction with their "Cloud-service" .... I would suppose this might be the future for the manufacturers. What's missing is the "bit" more of data-viewing.

.... well maybe it really is the time for a tablet-version Thinking-about  (isn't the 1st time I was asked about that ...)
Post Reply Post Reply
#23
Your device only comment is an excellent reason Sleeprider. That's very true of many people already.

TBMx: You don't need device specific apps if it's web-based app that is responsive! Even though QT can build for portable devices it's still a pain to maintain several clients. Plus, unless you do the online component we still run into the problem of how to load the data. Currently we cannot access the device via cellular modem, or wifi, so we are limited to SD card or SD-wifi transfer.

^i want to find a solution to this as well, but first things first.
Post Reply Post Reply


#24
I think most of the data summary and graphic outputs could work fine on a smartphone. The current left center and right panes would need to display separately, and the graphs could be scrolled and zoomed to be useful. That capability seems to be part of the computer versions anyway.

I don't know what the future will hold for the manufacturers. Currently, efficacy data is only available to us via SD card, and AFAIK no one has access to electronically transmitted data to the DME / physician portals. If they ever eliminated SD cards, (not unthinkable) it would really put a kink in things unless a BT or similar interface took its place. The biggest problem being, the manufacturers don't acknowledge or intend the efficacy data to be used by end-users. That feature is entirely marketed to DMEs and physicians.
Post Reply Post Reply
#25
I wouldn't fear the last point.
The machines which are data-capable have a huge (and I mean really huge) marketing advantage.

If ResMed would drop the Sd-Card without a proper replacement I could imagine sales dropping very fast^^.
One thing is: the user can (somehow) read the detailed data and on the other hand the manufacturer providing a software for the end-user who has (normally or in general) no clue to what that data is or how it should be interpreted.

I really understand why the latter is not done by the manufacturers - but I doubt that they are against the former^^ (otherwise ResMed or all the others would have found a way to pull their software of your site or the internet in general)
Post Reply Post Reply
#26
There is a reason this site is "educational" non-commercial and does not allow DME or commercial links. Be assured, that some manufacturers would be quite happy if these files were not available under a fair use provision.
Post Reply Post Reply


#27
Well, I can't see SD cards going away anytime soon. It would increase costs from a storage perspective and the reality is that most doctors don't need access to a patients data on a daily basis. Plus, these manufacturers would also have to solve for TBMx storage issue in every country they sell.

I personally don't think we will ever get access via the cellular modem, but I don't see we can't through BT or wifi modules.
Post Reply Post Reply
#28
Thanks for setting me straight on some of those issues. I know the manufacturers also use the SD slots to apply firmware updates.
Post Reply Post Reply
#29
One assumption I have made regarding wifi/BT vs cellular is that manufacturers only allow high-resolution data to be transferred via cellular for security reasons.   Data is transferred securely to a server maintained by the manufacturer, stored in compliance with the patient countries health data laws.  Access by doctor is probably encrypted, and controlled by login.  HIPAA requires access logs.  Very little way for patient data loss using cellular.  

The data provided to us by BT/Wifi is compliance data - if a doctor could access a machine via wifi or BT to get the high-resolution data they probably would.  That would also mean we could though.  The problem is that the HIPAA compliance chain is broken as soon as the data enters a wifi network or device uncontrolled by the manufacturer.  The SD card guarantees that data is transferred locally.

For this reason I can't see local transfer from SD going away, unless everyone goes full digital.  But then the devices would probably need onboard fixed storage.

I think long-term we need access to the cellular connection in such a way that allows compliance with HIPAA laws, or we will be stuck using SD cards.  

Assuming my assumption of wifi/bt vs cellular is correct, there is probably a way that we can get around the BT/wifi limitation, but that would require tampering with the onboard software.
Post Reply Post Reply


#30
some people simply have to proof their compliance - i.e. comercial drivers, pilots etc.

the internal nand-storage of the devices is one thing - if that goes broken or corrupted for whatever reason that can be a big problem for that people. Having a "semi external" storage device where only at one single given point data is transferred to is one way of having valid backups for such cirumstances (plus it is a convenient way to share this information)

another thing is plain coverage. all this "wireless" connections are a cool thing - if you simply don't have coverage what to do? ... machine stops working? how do you transfer new medical settings to this persons? (it's not so much of an "alien" thing - just take a longer ride on a not so well equipped cruise-ship - I doubt cell coverage on the atlantic^^)

SD hopefully goes away in the near future - micro-SD would be so much easier^^ - even USB would be much more easy.
Post Reply Post Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Problem with Sleepyhead current version sirto 3 109 08-15-2017, 11:03 PM
Last Post: sirto
  Sleepyhead software version BillMar 17 854 07-28-2017, 07:43 AM
Last Post: AlanE
  [Admin Note] New ResScan version 5.8 SuperSleeper 1 1,520 05-26-2017, 12:43 PM
Last Post: SuperSleeper
  ResScan Version: 5.7 help Bandit1 1 508 03-27-2017, 02:04 PM
Last Post: AlanE
Arrow [Admin Note] ResScan - [version 5.7] SuperSleeper 70 17,359 02-11-2017, 03:11 PM
Last Post: MortR
  old version of sleephead download car54 4 782 09-26-2016, 01:31 PM
Last Post: Crimson Nape
  Sleephead broken Gl version ? jpoker 2 751 09-25-2016, 07:46 PM
Last Post: GoodnightWalter

Forum Jump:

New Posts   Today's Posts




About Apnea Board

Apnea Board is an educational web site designed to empower Sleep Apnea patients.

For any more information, please use our contact form.