Energy is now one of the first questions serious buyers ask about a hyperbaric chamber. A decade ago the conversation opened with pressure, shell construction and price. Today clinic groups, wellness chains and distributors evaluating a mild hyperbaric oxygen therapy (mild HBOT) installation are as likely to open with a different question: what does this machine draw, and what does it cost to run across a full day of sessions?
A chamber is not passive furniture — compressors, controls, lighting, communications and an oxygen supply train all consume power every hour the room is open, and across a full operating week that becomes a visible line in the management accounts. A second driver has since appeared. Corporate wellness buyers, hospital procurement teams and regional chains increasingly report Scope 2 emissions and ask suppliers to account for the electricity their equipment consumes. An operator who can evidence how many kilowatt-hours a session consumes negotiates from a stronger position than one who cannot. This article sets out where the energy goes, how to read a power specification honestly, how to meter your own consumption, how to convert kilowatt-hours into a defensible carbon figure, and which levers to pull first.
| Driver pushing energy up the agenda | Who raises it | What they expect from you |
|---|---|---|
| Utility operating cost visibility | Finance and owners | A defensible cost per session |
| Scope 2 emissions reporting | Corporate and institutional clients | A stated figure with a stated method |
| Supplier comparisons in tenders | Procurement teams | Like-for-like energy per client-session |
| Multi-site benchmarking | Group operations | Normalised, comparable unit metrics |
| Demand-charge exposure | Facilities management | Understanding of peak behaviour |
Introduction: Where the HBOT Energy Question Actually Starts
Most operators begin this work for one of three reasons: a utility bill that surprised them, a tender that asked for consumption data, or a capital decision between two quotations that are close on price. All three lead to the same requirement — a number per session, produced by measurement rather than estimation.
The complication is that energy use is not one number: it varies by session phase, protocol, target pressure, occupancy, season and room conditioning, so two sites running identical equipment can report different figures without either being wrong. That is why the definition matters as much as the measurement.
Throughout this article we use only specifications confirmed for the HyperbaricO2Care range. Where a figure is site-specific and we lack it, you will find a [TO CONFIRM] slot rather than a guess.
| Confirmed specification | Basis used in this article |
|---|---|
| Shell construction | Hard shell, aviation-grade steel, fully welded |
| Operating pressure | 1.1–1.7 atm across the range; POLARIS Duo rated to 1.75 atm |
| Compression and delivery | Air pressurisation; oxygen delivered by mask or hood |
| Oxygen equivalence | ≥80% for AURA One; ≥90% for remaining models |
| Pressurisation time | 5–25 minutes depending on model and configuration |
| AURA One operating level | ≤50 dB |
| Pressure relief | Triple path: mechanical, electromagnetic and manual |
| Emergency communication | 4G emergency call function |
| Conformity and quality system | CE marked; manufactured under ISO 13485 |
Where Energy Goes During an HBOT Session
Before managing HBOT energy use, build a load map. A session is not one homogeneous block of consumption: it moves through phases, and the phases draw differently.
The heaviest load in most mild HBOT installations is the pressurisation train. Moving a room-sized volume of air to 1.1–1.7 atm requires sustained compressor work, and our chambers are specified across pressurisation times of 5–25 minutes depending on model, target pressure and configuration. Draw during that window is a multiple of draw during the plateau, which is why a site running short, frequent sessions shows a different load profile from one running long sessions — [TO CONFIRM: rated compressor kW per model, and draw during pressurisation versus plateau].
The second cluster is routinely overlooked: controls, cabin lighting, intercom, monitoring sensors and the 4G emergency call module draw for as long as the unit is powered, whether anyone is inside or not. Individually small; summed across twelve powered-on hours, not small at all.
| Session phase | Loads active | Duration | Draw profile | Energy-planning consequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-session standby | Controls, lighting standby, communications | [TO CONFIRM: warm-up policy] | Low, continuous | Sets the baseline floor; unmanaged, becomes overnight consumption |
| Pressurisation | Air compressor, controls, comms, lighting | 5–25 minutes per specification | Peak | Largest single block; drives peak demand exposure |
| Treatment plateau | Controls, lighting, comms, oxygen equipment | [TO CONFIRM: protocol length] | Moderate | Longest phase; total energy often exceeds pressurisation |
| Equalisation / descent | Controls, valves, comms | Variable | Low | Ignored in metering because it is short |
| Turnaround | Cleaning devices, lighting, ventilation, door cycles | [TO CONFIRM: turnaround target] | Moderate, intermittent | Counted by staff as “between sessions”, still metered by the utility |
A third cluster sits outside the chamber but is caused by it. Equipment installed in a conditioned room interacts with the building’s HVAC: motor and compressor heat is rejected into the room, and a warmer room must be cooled harder. Operators who meter only the chamber feed under-report the true cost of the service.
| Load cluster | Measured at | Owner | Common metering mistake |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pressurisation and controls | Chamber feeder or sub-meter | Equipment | Reading the nameplate rather than metered draw |
| Oxygen supply train | Dedicated circuit where present | Equipment / consumables | Assuming the oxygen pathway consumes nothing |
| Cabin comfort and lighting | Included in chamber feeder | Equipment | Dismissing it as negligible across long sessions |
| Room HVAC response | Building system or room sub-meter | Building | Attributing all HVAC load to weather |
| Turnaround equipment | Room-level metering | Operations | Treating cleaning devices as plug load, not session cost |
| Phase | Why the draw differs | Typical metering trap |
|---|---|---|
| Pressurisation | Compressor doing continuous work against rising pressure | Short duration hides it inside long averaging intervals |
| Plateau | No compression work; only life-support and comfort loads | Assumed negligible despite being the longest phase |
| Standby | Everything energised, nothing productive | Excluded from session definitions entirely |
Oxygen delivery carries its own energy identity, since that equipment runs across the whole plateau rather than the pressurisation window. The full mechanical and electrical prerequisite list for the room, including supply characteristics and ventilation, is set out in our installation and site preparation guide; this article stays with energy.
Reading an Energy Specification: Rated kW, Duty Cycle, Standby Draw
Manufacturers and buyers routinely talk past each other about power. The nameplate says one number, the operator observes another, and both are right because they describe different things. Settling this distinction is the cheapest energy decision you will make, because it determines whether two quotations are compared fairly.
Rated power describes the maximum simultaneous draw the equipment is designed to present. Real consumption is rated power multiplied by duty cycle — the proportion of time each subsystem is loaded. A compressor at full output for five minutes and unloaded for fifty contributes far less to the daily bill than its nameplate implies, while control electronics drawing a modest constant load for twelve hours may contribute more.
| Specification term | What it means | What it does not tell you | How to use it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rated power (kW) | Maximum designed simultaneous draw | Typical draw in normal operation | Size the circuit and check demand-charge exposure |
| Duty cycle | Proportion of time a subsystem is loaded | Absolute energy used | Combine with rated power to estimate energy |
| Standby draw | Consumption while powered but not treating | Whether standby is avoidable | Multiply by powered-on hours; often the largest controllable slice |
| Peak demand (kW) | Highest draw in a metering interval | Average consumption | Relevant where tariffs bill demand separately |
| Energy per session (kWh) | The operator’s real unit of comparison | Nothing further needed for cost accounting | Request from suppliers; verify yourself |
Standby deserves attention because it is the most unmanaged number. A unit powered overnight and across booking gaps consumes energy that treats nobody. Policy varies widely — some sites power down completely, others hold ready state — and the difference compounds across a year. [TO CONFIRM: measured standby draw per model, and cold-start time from fully powered-down to treatment-ready.]
Model selection matters here: AURA One, our single-user platform specified at ≤50 dB, and POLARIS Duo, rated to 1.75 atm, have different energy identities, so kilowatt-hours per occupied session beats kilowatts per machine as a comparison basis. Full specifications sit on the AURA One page.
| Comparison basis | What it favours | When it misleads |
|---|---|---|
| Rated kW per machine | Smaller units | Ignores occupancy and throughput |
| kWh per session | Efficient compression, short cycles | Ignores how many clients occupied the session |
| kWh per client-session | Credits high-occupancy units correctly | Requires a consistent definition of “session” |
| kWh per operating hour | Low standby design | Penalises units deliberately held ready |
| Peak kW | Sites exposed to demand charges | Irrelevant where tariffs bill energy only |
Measuring kWh per Session: A Practical Metering Protocol
Nothing here substitutes for measuring your own installation. Tariffs vary, protocols vary, room conditions vary, and two otherwise identical sites can differ substantially. The following protocol should precede any energy claim — whether that claim goes into a business case, a tender response or a sustainability report.
Begin with sub-metering at the chamber feeder rather than inferring consumption from the building bill. A dedicated sub-meter, even a clamp-on unit deployed for two weeks, produces per-session data that building-level analysis cannot resolve. Sample fast enough to separate pressurisation from plateau.
| Metering decision | Recommended approach | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Measurement point | Chamber feeder sub-meter | Isolates equipment from building noise |
| Sampling interval | Short enough to resolve phases | Compressor peaks otherwise average away |
| Recording granularity | Per session, with phase breakdown | Produces per-session kWh, the operator’s unit |
| Standby capture | Separate interval for powered-not-treating | Reveals the most under-managed load |
| Minimum sample window | A representative week of sessions | Avoids conclusions drawn from one quiet day |
| Concurrent capture | Room temperature and HVAC state | Explains seasonal drift in session kWh |
Then normalise. Raw kilowatt-hours do not compare across protocols; kilowatt-hours per client-session do. Decide whether your unit of account is a session (one chamber cycle) or a client-session (one person treated), write the definition down, and hold it constant. Multi-site groups need this most, since normalisation is the only way to benchmark and to spot an outlier site before it becomes a budget problem — the same comparability logic underpins our multi-site fleet standardisation approach.
Finally, keep the data long enough to see seasonality: ambient temperature, HVAC load, occupancy pattern and daylight all shift between January and July for reasons unrelated to the machine. Before publishing any figure externally, allow at least one full seasonal swing — [TO CONFIRM: your observation window sufficient to span summer and winter peaks].
| Step | Action | Output |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Install or borrow a sub-meter at the chamber feeder | Raw interval data |
| 2 | Define session versus client-session | Written unit of account |
| 3 | Log sessions with protocol, occupancy and duration | Attributable consumption dataset |
| 4 | Separate standby from active consumption | Standby reduction target |
| 5 | Sample across a representative week | Seasonally defensible baseline |
| 6 | Re-measure after any change | Verified rather than assumed saving |
| Season | What shifts | Metering consequence |
|---|---|---|
| Warm months | Higher cooling load in the treatment room | Session kWh rises without any equipment fault |
| Cold months | Equipment heat offsets heating demand | Session kWh may fall while the machine is unchanged |
| Shoulder periods | Mixed HVAC behaviour | Least reliable window for a baseline |
Session kilowatt-hours multiplied by your contracted tariff belongs in the same model as service intervals, filters and labour — our total cost of ownership analysis positions energy alongside the other ownership cost lines. Re-measure after any compressor service, control update or change in session mix to keep that model honest.
Oxygen Supply Energy: On-Site Generation Versus Delivered Gas
Energy discussions usually fixate on the compressor, because it is visible and loud. Yet the oxygen supply train runs for the whole plateau rather than the pressurisation window alone, so its share of session kilowatt-hours can be substantial — making the choice at once an energy, logistics and resilience decision.
| Supply route | Where energy is consumed | Predictability | Dependency | Energy-planning note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Generation on site | Site electricity every session | Draw follows occupancy | Continuity tied to power reliability | Appears fully in metered consumption |
| Delivered high-pressure cylinders | Mostly off site, in production and transport | Ordered quantities, not metered draw | Deliveries, storage, handling | Moves energy outside your meter, into supply chain |
| Bulk or central supply | Central plant plus distribution | Depends on facility arrangement | Facility infrastructure | Requires allocation rules to attribute to sessions |
Our chambers pressurise the cabin with air and deliver oxygen by mask or hood at ≥80% equivalence on AURA One and ≥90% on the remaining models. Within that architecture the choice between electrically driven generation and delivered gas has very different carbon implications — and this is where operators often make their first honest mistake. Energy inside your meter is not the same as total emissions associated with your service. Switching to delivered gas lowers metered kilowatt-hours while moving emissions upstream into production and transport. A credible footprint acknowledges both rather than optimising whichever boundary flatters it.
| Accounting boundary | Includes | Effect on reported figure | Appropriate use |
|---|---|---|---|
| Metered electricity only | On-site consumption | Lowest number | Internal operational dashboards |
| Metered plus upstream losses | Site draw plus generation and distribution losses | Moderately higher | Like-for-like supplier comparison |
| Full service boundary | Equipment, oxygen pathway, HVAC share, consumables, freight share | Highest and most defensible | External reporting and tenders |
| Per-session allocation | All of the above divided by client-sessions | Comparable unit figure | Cross-site benchmarking |
| Question | Generation-led answer | Delivered-gas answer |
|---|---|---|
| Where does it appear in my meter? | Entirely | Only handling equipment |
| How does it scale with occupancy? | Directly | Stepped with delivery volumes |
| What happens during an outage? | Stops without backup provision | Continues from stored inventory |
| Who owns upstream emissions? | Shared with the grid mix | Shared with the gas supply chain |
| What is the verification path? | Sub-meter reading | Delivery records plus consumption |
Whichever route you select, plan redundancy: if your oxygen pathway depends on mains electricity, emergency procedures must address an outage — the 4G emergency call function exists precisely because a powered dependency can fail.
Facility Loads Around the Chamber: HVAC, Lighting and Plug Load
Chambers rarely operate alone. The room carries cooling, ventilation, lighting, cleaning equipment and often reception furniture on the same distribution board. Scoping the project as a single machine underestimates both the electrical work and the ongoing consumption.
HVAC interaction is the largest secondary effect and the hardest to quantify. Energy reaching a motor or compressor inside the room ends as heat the building must reject: warm climates add measurably to cooling load, while cold ones see that same heat offset heating demand. The sign flips seasonally, which is why annual averages mislead.
| Room load | Driven by | Controllable | Practical lever |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cooling response to equipment heat | Equipment duty and climate | Partly | Setpoint discipline, heat rejection routing |
| Ventilation and air changes | Room policy and clinical requirements | Yes | Match ventilation rate to occupancy |
| General and task lighting | Operating hours | Yes | Zoned lighting switched with demand |
| Cleaning and turnaround devices | Session frequency | Yes | Efficient equipment, consolidated changeovers |
| Reception, screens and office equipment | Front-office practice | Yes | Standard office efficiency measures |
| Domestic hot water and shared services | Facility-wide | Indirectly | Allocate rather than attribute to HBOT |
Lighting and plug load deserve a mention because they are the cheapest wins. Zoned lighting that follows occupancy rather than one switch for the whole suite costs little to specify and repays continuously. [TO CONFIRM: installed lighting load in your treatment room, and hours per week energised with no client present.]
Allocation is what makes facility load honest: choose a defensible basis, document it and apply it consistently. A simple rule applied identically each quarter supports trend analysis, whereas a sophisticated rule changed annually destroys comparability.
| Allocation basis | Suitable for | Weakness |
|---|---|---|
| Floor area proportion | Shared suites with mixed use | Ignores intensity differences between rooms |
| Hours of exclusive use | Rooms dedicated to HBOT most of the day | Awkward with shared consultation space |
| Sub-metered proportion | Rooms with dedicated circuits | Higher installation cost |
| Headcount share | Wellness centres with shared amenities | Weak causal link |
| Session count share | Multi-service clinics | Requires careful service definitions |
| Method | Effort | Typical accuracy | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ignore facility load entirely | None | Poor | Nothing beyond rough internal notes |
| Flat allocation rule | Low | Moderate | Most single-clinic operators |
| Room sub-metering | Medium | Good | Groups benchmarking multiple sites |
| Full circuit-level metering | High | Best | Sustainability disclosures and tenders |
Converting Metered kWh into a Defensible Carbon Footprint
Converting kilowatt-hours into emissions requires one external input: an emission factor describing how much carbon dioxide equivalent is emitted per kilowatt-hour delivered. Several legitimate sources publish such factors, differing in scope, vintage and geography. Choosing one and documenting it matters more than choosing the perfect one, because credibility rests on traceability.
Electricity factors come in two families. Location-based factors reflect the average generation mix of the grid you draw from; market-based factors reflect contractual instruments — certificates, power purchase agreements — you have actually procured. Frameworks commonly require both, because they answer different questions: one describes the physical system, the other describes what you chose to buy.
| Factor family | Question answered | Typical use | Caution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Location-based grid average | What mix served this consumption? | Trend reporting, site comparison | Shifts annually with grid decarbonisation |
| Market-based contractual | What did we contractually procure? | Renewable sourcing claims | Requires genuine instruments, not assertions |
| Supplier-published factor | What does our contracted tariff imply? | Supplier-specific reporting | Methodology differs between suppliers |
| Time-matched hourly factor | What mix served consumption that hour? | Advanced optimisation claims | Needs interval data and mature sourcing |
Apply the factor consistently and show your working. A credible disclosure states its unit of account, factor source and vintage, boundary, and basis. Two sites reporting different absolute figures may both be credible if transparent about method; two reporting the same figure under undisclosed different methods are comparable to nothing.
| Disclosure element | Why readers need it | What to state |
|---|---|---|
| Unit of account | Makes the number comparable | kWh and kg CO2e per client-session |
| Emission factor source | Allows reproduction | Named dataset and vintage year |
| Reporting boundary | Prevents cherry-picking | Scope 2 only, plus named exclusions |
| Location versus market basis | Clarifies the question answered | Both disclosed separately |
| Allocation rule | Explains included share | Sub-metered proportion of room circuits |
| Restatement policy | Handles method change transparently | Prior periods restated when method changes |
| Step | Input | Output |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Choose unit of account | kWh per client-session |
| 2 | Choose emission factor and record its vintage | kg CO2e per kWh |
| 3 | Multiply metered kWh by the factor | kg CO2e for the period |
| 4 | State the boundary and exclusions | Reproducible disclosure note |
| 5 | Round to match input confidence | Published figure |
Two cautions. Avoid precision theatre: a footprint derived from an average factor carries real uncertainty, and three significant figures implies rigour the input does not support. And do not let an available carbon number tempt the compliance line — emissions accounting sits entirely outside what may be claimed about clinical effect, and the rules governing medical claims are unchanged by whether your electricity came from a renewable contract. Keep sustainability reporting in its own document, separate from any client-facing therapy claim.
Reduction Levers Ranked by Disruption and Payback
Once a baseline exists, every lever sits on two axes: how much it saves, and how much operational friction it creates. Payback ranking depends entirely on your tariff, so verify against your own price rather than anyone else’s. [TO CONFIRM: contracted tariff per kWh, demand charge structure, and the metering interval your utility uses.]
| Lever | What changes | Disruption | Character of saving | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eliminate unnecessary standby | Power-down policy and booking discipline | Low | Continuous, compounding | Compare standby hours before and after |
| Zone and schedule lighting | Lighting follows occupancy | Low | Small but steady | Repeat metering after the change |
| Match ventilation to occupancy | Ventilation schedule | Low to medium | Seasonal | Track comfort complaints |
| Consolidate sessions into blocks | Fewer idles and start-stop cycles | Medium | Large where gaps are frequent | Requires scheduling change |
| Improve power factor | Electrical correction | Medium | Depends on tariff structure | Utility bill comparison |
| Address HVAC response to equipment heat | Setpoints, zoning, heat rejection | Medium to high | Seasonal, capital-intensive | Sub-meter room before and after |
| Replace older auxiliary equipment | Efficient replacements | Medium | Varies by item | Item-level metering |
Schedule consolidation deserves a note: a tightly packed day has fewer powered-idle hours than scattered appointments, so identical throughput can cost less energy simply because the machine spends fewer hours awake and waiting. Energy planning therefore belongs beside the booking template — see our throughput planning guide.
Procurement is the other missed lever, because energy performance is decided at purchase rather than retrofit. Ask for metered rather than nameplate figures, ask about standby draw, and ask how energy per session behaves at different target pressures.
| Procurement question | Why ask it | What a good answer looks like |
|---|---|---|
| What is measured energy per session? | Nameplate is not consumption | A figure stated with its test conditions |
| What is the standby draw? | Governs overnight cost | Stated in watts, with a power-down policy |
| How does draw vary with target pressure? | Affects protocol economics | A stated relationship, not a single number |
| Are there configurable energy modes? | Enables site-level optimisation | Named modes and their trade-offs |
| How is consumption logged or exported? | Enables your own measurement | Description of available logging outputs |
| What maintenance preserves efficiency? | Fouling and wear raise draw | Named tasks, intervals and expected effect |
Note also that the durable construction defining this equipment class carries its own argument: a fully welded aviation-grade steel shell kept in service for longer spreads its embodied manufacturing emissions across more sessions, while replacement carries an upstream footprint of its own.
Energy Stewardship in Practice: Roles, Routines and Reporting
Measurement changes behaviour only when somebody owns it. In practice, sites that hold their numbers down are not those with the most sophisticated equipment; they are those where a named person reviews a monthly figure and asks why it moved. This section sets that out operationally rather than strategically.
Assign ownership explicitly. Someone must read the sub-meter or utility interval data, compare it against session count and escalate anomalies. In a group setting this becomes a defined role with a reporting line, because otherwise every site drifts at its own pace.
| Role | Energy responsibility | Cadence | Evidence produced |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operations lead | Owns the session energy figure | Monthly | Meter read compared with session count |
| Front desk / scheduling | Shapes idle time via the template | Weekly | Booking density report |
| Maintenance technician | Flags efficiency drift in equipment | Per service | Service record noting draw changes |
| Finance | Converts kWh into cost at contracted tariff | Monthly | Utility line versus modelled expectation |
| Sustainability / quality lead | Owns factor and boundary decisions | Annually | Updated method note |
| Site manager | Approves disruption-bearing levers | Per proposal | Decision record with expected saving |
Build the review into routines that already exist: one standing line item for session kilowatt-hours in the monthly operations meeting creates accountability that a spreadsheet nobody opens never will.
| Routine | What it checks | Trigger for investigation |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly meter review | kWh per client-session trend | Movement beyond normal variation |
| Post-change re-measurement | Whether an intervention worked | Any change to equipment, settings or schedule |
| Seasonal comparison | HVAC-driven drift | Same month across consecutive years |
| Cross-site benchmarking | Outlier sites | Persistent divergence between comparable rooms |
| Annual method review | Factor vintage and boundary | Publication of updated datasets |
| Service-linked check | Efficiency after maintenance | Any compressor or control service |
Decide what to publish, and to whom. Internal dashboards can carry raw metered figures freely; anything external — a tender response, a corporate questionnaire, a client-facing page — needs the method note attached, because a bare number without a boundary is a reputation risk rather than an asset. To establish these figures for your own configuration, our technical support team works with buyers on specification questions.
| Audience | Appropriate disclosure | What must accompany it |
|---|---|---|
| Internal management | Raw kWh and cost per session | Nothing formal |
| Board or investors | Trend plus notable variances | Brief method note |
| Corporate clients | kWh and emissions per client-session | Method summary and boundary statement |
| Public sustainability report | Full boundary disclosure | Named factor source and vintage |
| Tender evaluation | Whatever the request specifies | Exact compliance with stated requirement |
Conclusion: Put Energy into the Specification From Day One
HBOT energy use is not an exotic concern reserved for sustainability departments. It is an operating cost, a procurement criterion and, increasingly, a qualification requirement in corporate and institutional sales. Operators who can answer three questions — what does a session consume, what does it cost at our tariff, and how did we measure it — negotiate better, budget better and complete tenders that competitors cannot.
The sequence matters: map loads before reducing, so effort lands where the energy actually goes; compare metered rather than nameplate figures; normalise per client-session; document the emission factor rather than shopping for a flattering one; start with the low-disruption levers. Assign an owner and a monthly routine, because unmanaged baselines drift upward.
| Step | Outcome | Common shortcut to avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Build the load map | Effort aimed at real consumption | Reducing the largest line without verifying it |
| Compare on metered kWh | Fair quotation comparison | Comparing nameplate ratings |
| Normalise per client-session | Benchmarkable figures | Publishing raw kWh across differing protocols |
| Document factor and boundary | Credible disclosure | Shopping for the lowest factor |
| Start with low-disruption levers | Compounding gains | Beginning with capital projects |
| Assign an owner and routine | Figures that improve | Reporting nobody reviews |
Two boundaries are worth restating. None of this substitutes for the equipment’s own certified status: HyperbaricO2Care chambers carry CE marking and are produced under an ISO 13485 quality management system, and no claim of FDA clearance is made or implied for these devices. Whatever your energy case says, it must not drift into claims about clinical outcomes, which are governed by separate rules. Your figures are also site-specific — tariff, climate, protocol mix and room all move the number — so treat everything here as a method rather than a benchmark, and fill the [TO CONFIRM] slots with your own metered data. Do that, and the resulting figure will stand up to scrutiny from finance, from procurement and from whichever client asks next what it costs to run.
Medical disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy should only be undertaken following assessment by a qualified healthcare professional. Untreated pneumothorax is an absolute contraindication to hyperbaric oxygen therapy. The HyperbaricO2Care product range operates at 1.1–1.7 atm depending on model, with POLARIS Duo rated to 1.75 atm; these devices are CE marked and manufactured under an ISO 13485 quality management system, and no claim of FDA clearance is made. Always follow local regulations, the manufacturer’s instructions for use and your own clinical governance procedures.