https://doi.org/10.5812/aapm.7513

A Clinical Evaluation of the GemStar® and the AmbIT® Pumps for Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia

authors:

avatar Aneeta Sinha 1 , avatar Michael Paech 2 , 3 , * , avatar Rupert Ledger 3 , avatar Nolan McDonnell 3 , avatar Elizabeth Nathan 4

Department of Anaesthesia, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK
School of Medicine and Pharmacology, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Medicine, King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women, Perth, Australia
Women and Infants Research Foundation, Perth, Australia
Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine: Vol.2, issue 2; e93345
published online: September 26, 2012
article type: Research Article
received: May 11, 2019
accepted: August 10, 2012

how to cite: Sinha A , Paech M, Ledger R, McDonnell N, Nathan E. A Clinical Evaluation of the GemStar® and the AmbIT® Pumps for Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia. Anesth Pain Med. 2012;2(2):e93345. https://doi.org/10.5812/aapm.7513.

Abstract

Background: Patient-controlled analgesia is used for both labor and postoperative analgesia.
Objectives: This study aimed to assess user satisfaction and functionality of two ambulatory, electronic patient controlled analgesia devices, the GemStar pump Hospira Inc., Illinois, USA) and the ambIT Ambulatory Infusion Therapy pump (Sorenson Medical Products, Utah, USA).
Patients and Methods: It was a randomized clinical trial of laboring women and postoperative gynecology patients receiving patient-controlled epidural analgesia. Patients were randomized to use one of the pumps and both anesthesiologists and patients completed questionnaires about aspects of pump function, and rated their satisfaction with the equipment. Midwives and high-dependency unit nurses also evaluated the pumps in each clinical setting.
Results: Forty patients, 20 laboring women and 20 postoperative patients were randomized and completed the study. The pumps were compared by nine anesthesiologists. Patient and staff satisfaction with both devices was high. Patient satisfaction did not significantly differ between groups (median 10 [8, 10] for the GemStar and 10 [9, 10] for the ambIT, P = 0.525]. The median staff satisfaction score was 8 [6, 8] for the GemStar and 7 [5, 8] for the ambIT (P = 0.154). Both patient cohorts rated each pump highly for most aspects of clinical function. Staff rated the ambIT pump more favourably with respect to portability and storage at the bedside whilst the GemStar had better assessments with respect to its consumables and interactions involving the electronic interface.
Conclusions: Both devices were well-rated by patients and staff, with no significant difference between them for overall satisfaction, and only minor differences with respect to their respective strengths and weaknesses.

References

  • 1.

    The references are available in PDF file.