Are there studies that show that the Vest is a superior form of ACT?

[Fran]

In Australia we can go to clinic for free, hospitalisations are free, prescriptions are heavily subsidised, particularly for children, we don't have the issue of insurance refusing to cover a medication. If a doctor prescribes it, we get it. This is without having any private health insurance AT ALL. If you are an Australian citizen, you are covered for all this.

So, without doing a lot of maths on it, I think we could be better off buying a vest for $15000, which I presume should last for some years, and getting all these other benefits for free, or in the case of prescriptions, subsidised.

I picked up six prescriptions for my son yesterday and paid $20.

I'm sure there are points for and against, but at the moment that's how I see it.

My son's doctor sees the vest as a "novelty". I don't know if he's right or wrong, but I do know that my son does not have one and has not been hospitalised with an exacerbation for four years. So, I'm not inclined to spend the $15000. That may change in the future, I'm keeping an open mind.

 

[Fran]

In Australia we can go to clinic for free, hospitalisations are free, prescriptions are heavily subsidised, particularly for children, we don't have the issue of insurance refusing to cover a medication. If a doctor prescribes it, we get it. This is without having any private health insurance AT ALL. If you are an Australian citizen, you are covered for all this.

So, without doing a lot of maths on it, I think we could be better off buying a vest for $15000, which I presume should last for some years, and getting all these other benefits for free, or in the case of prescriptions, subsidised.

I picked up six prescriptions for my son yesterday and paid $20.

I'm sure there are points for and against, but at the moment that's how I see it.

My son's doctor sees the vest as a "novelty". I don't know if he's right or wrong, but I do know that my son does not have one and has not been hospitalised with an exacerbation for four years. So, I'm not inclined to spend the $15000. That may change in the future, I'm keeping an open mind.

 

[Fran]

In Australia we can go to clinic for free, hospitalisations are free, prescriptions are heavily subsidised, particularly for children, we don't have the issue of insurance refusing to cover a medication. If a doctor prescribes it, we get it. This is without having any private health insurance AT ALL. If you are an Australian citizen, you are covered for all this.

So, without doing a lot of maths on it, I think we could be better off buying a vest for $15000, which I presume should last for some years, and getting all these other benefits for free, or in the case of prescriptions, subsidised.

I picked up six prescriptions for my son yesterday and paid $20.

I'm sure there are points for and against, but at the moment that's how I see it.

My son's doctor sees the vest as a "novelty". I don't know if he's right or wrong, but I do know that my son does not have one and has not been hospitalised with an exacerbation for four years. So, I'm not inclined to spend the $15000. That may change in the future, I'm keeping an open mind.

 

[Fran]

In Australia we can go to clinic for free, hospitalisations are free, prescriptions are heavily subsidised, particularly for children, we don't have the issue of insurance refusing to cover a medication. If a doctor prescribes it, we get it. This is without having any private health insurance AT ALL. If you are an Australian citizen, you are covered for all this.

So, without doing a lot of maths on it, I think we could be better off buying a vest for $15000, which I presume should last for some years, and getting all these other benefits for free, or in the case of prescriptions, subsidised.

I picked up six prescriptions for my son yesterday and paid $20.

I'm sure there are points for and against, but at the moment that's how I see it.

My son's doctor sees the vest as a "novelty". I don't know if he's right or wrong, but I do know that my son does not have one and has not been hospitalised with an exacerbation for four years. So, I'm not inclined to spend the $15000. That may change in the future, I'm keeping an open mind.

 

[Fran]

In Australia we can go to clinic for free, hospitalisations are free, prescriptions are heavily subsidised, particularly for children, we don't have the issue of insurance refusing to cover a medication. If a doctor prescribes it, we get it. This is without having any private health insurance AT ALL. If you are an Australian citizen, you are covered for all this.
<br />
<br />So, without doing a lot of maths on it, I think we could be better off buying a vest for $15000, which I presume should last for some years, and getting all these other benefits for free, or in the case of prescriptions, subsidised.
<br />
<br />I picked up six prescriptions for my son yesterday and paid $20.
<br />
<br />I'm sure there are points for and against, but at the moment that's how I see it.
<br />
<br />My son's doctor sees the vest as a "novelty". I don't know if he's right or wrong, but I do know that my son does not have one and has not been hospitalised with an exacerbation for four years. So, I'm not inclined to spend the $15000. That may change in the future, I'm keeping an open mind.

 

[BUTTONSIRELAND]

At the clinic I attend in Ireland we follow the Australian model of care. So the vest isn't available to us (unless we decide to purchase it ourselves), we are given the option of the flutter or acapella.
We are getting a new consultant in the new year - (s)he is supposedly currently practising in the states so it will be interesting to see if (s)he will be changing our existing model.
Like Fran I have an open mind about the vest and would be willing to give it a try.

 

[BUTTONSIRELAND]

At the clinic I attend in Ireland we follow the Australian model of care. So the vest isn't available to us (unless we decide to purchase it ourselves), we are given the option of the flutter or acapella.
We are getting a new consultant in the new year - (s)he is supposedly currently practising in the states so it will be interesting to see if (s)he will be changing our existing model.
Like Fran I have an open mind about the vest and would be willing to give it a try.

 

[BUTTONSIRELAND]

At the clinic I attend in Ireland we follow the Australian model of care. So the vest isn't available to us (unless we decide to purchase it ourselves), we are given the option of the flutter or acapella.
We are getting a new consultant in the new year - (s)he is supposedly currently practising in the states so it will be interesting to see if (s)he will be changing our existing model.
Like Fran I have an open mind about the vest and would be willing to give it a try.

 

[BUTTONSIRELAND]

At the clinic I attend in Ireland we follow the Australian model of care. So the vest isn't available to us (unless we decide to purchase it ourselves), we are given the option of the flutter or acapella.
We are getting a new consultant in the new year - (s)he is supposedly currently practising in the states so it will be interesting to see if (s)he will be changing our existing model.
Like Fran I have an open mind about the vest and would be willing to give it a try.

 

[BUTTONSIRELAND]

At the clinic I attend in Ireland we follow the Australian model of care. So the vest isn't available to us (unless we decide to purchase it ourselves), we are given the option of the flutter or acapella.
<br />We are getting a new consultant in the new year - (s)he is supposedly currently practising in the states so it will be interesting to see if (s)he will be changing our existing model.
<br />Like Fran I have an open mind about the vest and would be willing to give it a try.

 

[hmw]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Do insurance companies require a level of evidence for an intervention before they pay for it?</end quote></div>
Yes, this does play a role. In our case when seeking approval for Emily's vest we were told that if it helps avoid even ONE hospitalization (keep in mind, one hospitalization over the course of many years due to the lifetime warranty on the vest once it's paid for!) it was in the insurance company's best interests to cover it, since the hospital stay would far exceed the cost of the vest.

If I am remembering study objectives correctly, the primary objective of the trial in Canada is to track the number of exacerbations over the period of one year in those using the vest vs. those using pep therapy. Part of why they want to do this is to determine the true 'cost' of the vest to whoever ends up paying for it, no doubt.

 

[hmw]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Do insurance companies require a level of evidence for an intervention before they pay for it?</end quote></div>
Yes, this does play a role. In our case when seeking approval for Emily's vest we were told that if it helps avoid even ONE hospitalization (keep in mind, one hospitalization over the course of many years due to the lifetime warranty on the vest once it's paid for!) it was in the insurance company's best interests to cover it, since the hospital stay would far exceed the cost of the vest.

If I am remembering study objectives correctly, the primary objective of the trial in Canada is to track the number of exacerbations over the period of one year in those using the vest vs. those using pep therapy. Part of why they want to do this is to determine the true 'cost' of the vest to whoever ends up paying for it, no doubt.

 

[hmw]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Do insurance companies require a level of evidence for an intervention before they pay for it?</end quote></div>
Yes, this does play a role. In our case when seeking approval for Emily's vest we were told that if it helps avoid even ONE hospitalization (keep in mind, one hospitalization over the course of many years due to the lifetime warranty on the vest once it's paid for!) it was in the insurance company's best interests to cover it, since the hospital stay would far exceed the cost of the vest.

If I am remembering study objectives correctly, the primary objective of the trial in Canada is to track the number of exacerbations over the period of one year in those using the vest vs. those using pep therapy. Part of why they want to do this is to determine the true 'cost' of the vest to whoever ends up paying for it, no doubt.

 

[hmw]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Do insurance companies require a level of evidence for an intervention before they pay for it?</end quote>
Yes, this does play a role. In our case when seeking approval for Emily's vest we were told that if it helps avoid even ONE hospitalization (keep in mind, one hospitalization over the course of many years due to the lifetime warranty on the vest once it's paid for!) it was in the insurance company's best interests to cover it, since the hospital stay would far exceed the cost of the vest.

If I am remembering study objectives correctly, the primary objective of the trial in Canada is to track the number of exacerbations over the period of one year in those using the vest vs. those using pep therapy. Part of why they want to do this is to determine the true 'cost' of the vest to whoever ends up paying for it, no doubt.

 

[hmw]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Do insurance companies require a level of evidence for an intervention before they pay for it?</end quote>
<br />Yes, this does play a role. In our case when seeking approval for Emily's vest we were told that if it helps avoid even ONE hospitalization (keep in mind, one hospitalization over the course of many years due to the lifetime warranty on the vest once it's paid for!) it was in the insurance company's best interests to cover it, since the hospital stay would far exceed the cost of the vest.
<br />
<br />If I am remembering study objectives correctly, the primary objective of the trial in Canada is to track the number of exacerbations over the period of one year in those using the vest vs. those using pep therapy. Part of why they want to do this is to determine the true 'cost' of the vest to whoever ends up paying for it, no doubt.

 

[Brad]

Just an opinion from a Ole Cfer.
There is Nothing better than Real Manual Chest PT
IF it is done CORRECTLY by a good strong RT.

A Well Trained RT with the Drive to Perform Well can't be Beat! Pun Intended.

I have the Vest and the PEP .

 

[Brad]

Just an opinion from a Ole Cfer.
There is Nothing better than Real Manual Chest PT
IF it is done CORRECTLY by a good strong RT.

A Well Trained RT with the Drive to Perform Well can't be Beat! Pun Intended.

I have the Vest and the PEP .

 

[Brad]

Just an opinion from a Ole Cfer.
There is Nothing better than Real Manual Chest PT
IF it is done CORRECTLY by a good strong RT.

A Well Trained RT with the Drive to Perform Well can't be Beat! Pun Intended.

I have the Vest and the PEP .

 

[Brad]

Just an opinion from a Ole Cfer.
There is Nothing better than Real Manual Chest PT
IF it is done CORRECTLY by a good strong RT.

A Well Trained RT with the Drive to Perform Well can't be Beat! Pun Intended.

I have the Vest and the PEP .

 

[Brad]

Just an opinion from a Ole Cfer.
<br /> There is Nothing better than Real Manual Chest PT
<br /> IF it is done CORRECTLY by a good strong RT.
<br />
<br /> A Well Trained RT with the Drive to Perform Well can't be Beat! Pun Intended.
<br />
<br /> I have the Vest and the PEP .