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

Author(s):
Aneeta  SinhaAneeta Sinha1, Michael PaechMichael Paech2, 3,*, Rupert LedgerRupert Ledger3, Nolan McDonnellNolan McDonnell3, Elizabeth NathanElizabeth Nathan4
1Department of Anaesthesia, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK
2School of Medicine and Pharmacology, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
3Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Medicine, King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women, Perth, Australia
4Women and Infants Research Foundation, Perth, Australia
*Corresponding Author: Michael Paech, Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Medicine, King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women, 374 Bagot Road, Subiaco 6008, Western Australia, Perth, Australia. Tel.: +61-893402222, Fax: +61-893402260, E-mail: [email protected]. Email: [email protected]

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine:Vol. 2, issue 2; e93345
Published online:Sep 26, 2012
Article type:Research Article
Received:May 11, 2019
Accepted:Aug 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. doi: 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.

Copyright

© 2012, Author(s). This open-access article is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which allows for unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited.

Similar Articles

17
Oct
2015

A Comparison of Patient Controlled Epidural Analgesia With Intravenous Patient Controlled Analgesia for Postoperative Pain Management After Major Gynecologic Oncologic Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Farnaz Moslemi,
Sousan Rasooli,
Ali Baybordi,
Samad E.J. Golzari

Moslemi F, Rasooli S, Baybordi A, Golzari SE. A Comparison of Patient Controlled Epidural Analgesia With Intravenous Patient Controlled Analgesia for Postoperative Pain Management After Major Gynecologic Oncologic Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Anesth Pain Med. 2015;5(5):e29540. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/aapm.29540

24
Mar
2023

Opioid Free Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Surgery: A New Emerging Technique

Carolin Smita Kerketta,
Heena Chhanwal,
Divya Kheskani,
Vidhyasagar Sharma,
Palak Sitapara,
Vasu Girdhar Rathod

Kerketta CS, Chhanwal H, Kheskani D, Sharma V, Sitapara P, et al. Opioid Free Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Surgery: A New Emerging Technique. J Cell Mol Anesth. 2023;8(4):e151432. doi: https://doi.org/10.22037/jcma.v8i3.41302

10
May
2015

Comparison of the Effect of Incremental Bolus and Incremental Infusion Regimens of Remifentanil on Labour Pain

Maryam Khooshideh,
Ali Shahriari,
Mahdi Sheikh

Khooshideh M, Shahriari A, Sheikh M. Comparison of the Effect of Incremental Bolus and Incremental Infusion Regimens of Remifentanil on Labour Pain. Shiraz E-Med J. 2015;16(5):e25626. doi: https://doi.org/10.17795/semj25626

16
Sep
2014

Intravenous Patient-Controlled Remifentanil Versus Paracetamol in Post-Operative Pain Management in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

Alireza Jahangiri Fard,
Touraj Babaee,
Seyed Mostafa Alavi,
Ali Akbar Nasiri,
Seyed Mohamad Mehran Ghoreishi,
Noor Mohammad Noori
,et al.

Jahangiri Fard A, Babaee T, Alavi SM, Nasiri AA, Ghoreishi SMM, et al. Intravenous Patient-Controlled Remifentanil Versus Paracetamol in Post-Operative Pain Management in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery. Anesth Pain Med. 2014;4(5):e19862. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/aapm.19862

14
Oct
2017

Comparing the Effectiveness of Patient Control Analgesia Pump and Bolus Morphine in Controlling Pain After Cardiopulmonary Bypass Graft Surgery

Vali Imantalab,
Ali Mirmansouri,
Ali Mohammadzadeh Jouryabi,
Bahram Naderi Nabi,
Gholamreza Kanani,
Nassir Nassiri Sheikhani
,et al.

Imantalab V, Mirmansouri A, Mohammadzadeh Jouryabi A, Naderi Nabi B, Kanani G, et al. Comparing the Effectiveness of Patient Control Analgesia Pump and Bolus Morphine in Controlling Pain After Cardiopulmonary Bypass Graft Surgery. Anesth Pain Med. 2017;7(5):e12756. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/aapm.12756

Download PDF1.01 MB

Crossmark

Crossmark

Checking

Share on
Cited by
Metrics

Ordering Reprints

Articles are published under the Creative Commons license stated on each article. No permission or royalty fee is required for uses permitted by that license. CCC handles optional bulk and customized reprint orders. Any quotation covers production and delivery services only, not copyright permission. > Request Reprints from CCC 

Search Relations

Author(s):

Related Articles