 NOYBSt. John 3.16Premium
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:1
4 edits | reply to en102
Re: What he meant was.. Whatever is being monitored, if it is that critical then you would not be at home. And if you are then you either need to get a different doctor or give someone else power of attorney because you've just demonstrated your incompetence.
Remote (home) monitoring is not for life support. If life, limb, etc. would be endangered by temporary, or even longer term, outage then it is not an appropriate use even with an SLA from ISP.
Think about it, it's not like your doctor is going to be glued to your monitor stream all day and night. That is what ICU is for.
--
Be a Good Netizen - Read, Know & Complain About Overly Restrictive Tyrannical ISP ToS & AUP »comcast.net/terms/ »verizon.net/policies/
Say Thanks with a Tool Points Donation |
|
| Actaully there are a lot of elderly people that refuse or can't afford the care they need.
If for what ever reason they are living away from a doctor and using a internet connection for monitoring I would call that critcal.
If broadband speeds get better there could be a lot of enhancements in the area of home care. 1 nurse could monitor video feeds from homes of multiple people, VOIP communications, etc.
All I'm saying is think outside the box.
--
Folding for our future!! |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | While I do agree that it is possible (i.e. basic web cam, portable devices such as a blood/sugar monitor, pulse monitor, etc) where you could upload a day's worth of stats for review.
I wouldn't expect a hospital to have anything less than a 10Mbps or better (most likely DS-3) for voice and data.
Customer can not be considered stable while there are issues with companies adding filters, nebudad or caps on consumption.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
