HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Skryabina, E. A. Articles by Dunn, T. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Skryabina, E. A. Articles by Dunn, T. S.

ELENA A. SKRYABINA, PH.D., is Clinical Engineer; and TERESA S. DUNN, M.SC., is Centre Manager, Pump Evaluation Laboratory, Bath Institute of Medical Engineering, University of Bath, Wolfson Centre, Royal United Hospital, Combe Park, Bath, United Kingdom.

Address correspondence to Dr. Skryabina at the Bath Institute of Medical Engineering, University of Bath, Wolfson Centre, Royal United Hospital, Combe Park, Bath BA1 3NG, United Kingdom (adseas{at}bath.ac.uk).

Purpose. The properties, performance, and applications of nonelectric disposable infusion pumps are reviewed. Summary. All nonelectric disposable infusion pumps exploit the same physical principle: mechanical restriction within the flow path determines the speed of pressurized fluid. The pressure generated by disposable pumps on fluid is 250–600 mm Hg, compared with 5–1200 mm Hg of pressure for electric pumps. There are several types of disposable infusion pumps, including elastomeric, positive-pressure (spring-powered and gas-pressure-powered), negative-pressure (vacuum), and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pumps. The accuracy of each pump’s flow rate is dependent on several factors, including temperature, fluid viscosity, atmospheric pressure, back pressure, partial filling, and storage. Disposable infusion pumps can be used in many areas, including home care, PCA, patient-controlled epidural analgesia, continuous peripheral analgesia, continuous epidural analgesia, continuous i.v. analgesia, and pediatrics applications. The advantages of disposable infusion pumps include their light weight, small size, simplicity of use, independence from an external power supply, elimination of programming errors, and disposability. Disadvantages include the possibility of inaccurate flow rates, fixed reservoir volume, lack of a facility to change the flow rate and bolus-dose volume to provide adequate analgesia, inability to trace the history of the analgesia demand by patients, inability to combine PCA with background continuous infusions, and long-term cost. Conclusion. Despite some disadvantages and limited areas of applicability, disposable infusion pumps provide patients with advantages, such as portability, simplicity, and disposability, especially for the administration of analgesia. Understanding their physical and mechanical characteristics and their appropriate application may optimize patient care. Index terms: Analgesics and antipyretics; Costs; Devices; Economics; Elastomers; Errors, medication; Flow; Health care; Patient-controlled analgesia; Pediatrics; Pressure; Storage; Temperature; Viscosity

 

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. Tanzilli, M. Sordi, A. Arrivi, E. Mangieri, and M. Scappaticci Acute profound abciximab induced thrombocytopenia: a correct management of a methodological error BMJ Case Reports, October 5, 2009; 2009(oct05_1): bcr1220081381 - bcr1220081381. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				F. Remerand, A. S. Vuitton, M. Palud, S. Buchet, X. Pourrat, A. Baud, M. Laffon, and J. Fusciardi Elastomeric Pump Reliability in Postoperative Regional Anesthesia: A Survey of 430 Consecutive Devices Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2008; 107(6): 2079 - 2084. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. S. Reuben and A. Buvanendran Preventing the Development of Chronic Pain After Orthopaedic Surgery with Preventive Multimodal Analgesic Techniques J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., June 1, 2007; 89(6): 1343 - 1358. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]