EBME Forums Forums Free discussion Free discussion Baxter Colleague "Ugent Device Correction"

Yes I understand the reasoning but my point is that Baxter advocate the use of a measuring cylinder in your document - possibly less accurate than a burette selected to make measurement errors negligible for all practical purposes. Although being able to determine that a device is under-infusing to 5 decimal-places, using gravimetric methods, is much more reassuring when trying to convince a manufacturer that argues the point I suppose.

There are not that many infusion device manufacturers that specify manufacturers type-tests when servicing devices, to my knowledge. I think common-sense must prevail under these circumstances where devices under infuse by significant margins beyond even the relatively "limited" accuracy of burettes, measuring cylinders, or even IDA devices- especially if the method, i.e. bag-height, temperature, fluid, set, etc, is identical and the errors in the measurement device can be quantified.

The IDA is a nice toy, but for 'volume' (i.e. slightly more than one a day...) pump testing in the lab, a burette, fresh saline bag and set is nice, simple and consistant. Testing hundred of pumps, thousands of times this way, I've yet to see one infuse outside of its spec. If only the Colleagues problems were as simple as just violating infused volume tolerances!

Personally, I have absolutely no axe to grind against Baxter (or, for that matter, against any equipment “manufacturer”, or country of origin), as, like most other veterans in this game, I like to take each bit of kit on merit (and many first-class manufacturers have been known to come up with the occasional duffer). But may I make one quick point here that may not be universally recognised? That is that Baxter is what used to be known as a “catalogue company” (and a big, across-the-board catalogue at that). Certainly their earlier pumps (I’m thinking of the venerable 6100, for example) were OEM’d by others (Sharp in Japan, in the case of the 6100, if my memory serves me well). I suspect that their current range is similarly sourced “elsewhere”. In fact, if I had the time, I would open up the dead Colleague lying on the bench near to where I’m sitting and have a look (I’m talking about the IV pump, not my buddy – I’m working alone at the moment). I can see at a glance, however, that it is labelled “Made in Singapore”.

One of the reasons that I advocate removing the covers of every piece of new equipment encountered (ie, in order to have a look inside), is that then you know what you’re dealing with!

Meanwhile, for those not familiar with the Baxter range of pumps, the following link gives a fair idea:-

http://www.signaturemedical.com/baxter.html

For older stuff, take a look at:- http://www.medfurbish.com/v_refurbished_iv_pumps.htm (...there's a nice old Ivac 530 shown on that one, too)!

Lastly, those of us with fond memories of the 6100 may be pleased to hear that they are popular these days in veterinary clinics.

Hi Geoff,

I suspect that combinations of problems that are allowed to go unresolved over a considerable period of the prescribed life-cycle of any product, that are the cause of it failing to meet specified performance or function, laid down in manuals, etc, that is perceived as unreliable and relatively expensive to repair, either in-house or using the manufacturer's service agent, will contribute to a loss of sales, irrespective of manufacturer.

How about the Tekmar501, the Vickers Treonic C30 and the IVAC231 Geoff? Did you ever open any of those up? I usually found things I didn't want to recognise in them.

Happy New Year to one and all.

Ah yes, Richard, down Memory Lane once again! But of course you must always “look under the bonnet”, as it were.

Perhaps we should start a couple of new threads. Something along the lines of “Kit I Loved – And Why”, and “Kit I Thought Was Rubbish – And Why”. We should, of course, stick to stuff no longer made, so as not to ruffle too many feathers, though, eh?

The brands that you mention are all from the early days of IV pumps, though, Richard. Tekmar, was (is still?) really into lab kit. Their foray into IV pumps was but a brief one. But at least one of those you mention (the obvious one, that is) went on to greater things (despite incessant name changes), did it not?

Meanwhile, here are some nice links for you to check-out:-

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7575541761

http://www.meql.com

http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/reporter/?ID=1989

http://www.somatechnology.com/MedicalProducts/BaxterTravenolFlo-Gard6100Pump.asp

Must get on with the real work now, Mate.

What baffles me is the difference between the response to these problems with the Baxter pump in America and in the UK. The MHRA seemed incredibly slow at getting any sort of notice out - and then it didn't appear to deal with the major problems that were being highlighted in the States - and presumably being found by users over here.

Are the MHRA really that vulnerable to prosecution by manufacturers if they err on the side of patient safety and put out a warning which is subsequently proved to be unfounded ? Personnaly I've more respect for a manufacturer who jumps up and down and shouts at the first sign of a problem, making everyone aware of it and therefore a bit more careful. If the alarm was unfounded (or user error) they can always issue a full explanation, which would increase everyones confidence in the product, surely ?

Maybe this is the sort of thing you are referring to, Roy?

This is a good site for those who like to keep an eye on what nurses are saying in the States:- http://allnurses.com/forums

And, lastly, here is another nice link that gives a poster-like notice that some might find useful:-

http://www.dhsspsni.gov.uk/niaic/guidance_publications/infusionpumps.pdf

check here too...

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfMAUDE/search.cfm?searchoptions=1

Maybe I'm picking up the wrong signals here but manufacturing quality in the far east is excellent. Their laws are way different to ours in that a manufacturer in Taiwan say, sub contracted to make a product for a company in Japan, can legally rebadge maybe every third item on their assembly line and sell it as their own product much cheaper than those meant for Japan.

The euro-myth that far eastern quality is poor is total b*llsh*t.

You may be right about that “euro-myth”. For instance, I have always considered Atom equipment to be first class. But how much of their stuff do we see in the UK?

I think what we all need to know, exit Old Buddy, is did you find the clip stuck in there? … and, (dare we wonder) what happened next?

for example...

My Glock 19 airsoft pistol is a perfect working replica of the real thing (superb quality and weighs the same too) only its powered by propane and fires 6mm ammo accurately out to about 50 yards.

Its made by a company called KWA in Taiwan who manufacture guns for KSC in Japan. The official KSC G19 costs about $150, but as KWA are allowed to badge some of the production for themselves, they pop it in a cheaper looking box and photocopy the KSC manual, then sell it to me for $70! Its the same gun and this process is legal in the far east and applies to all manner of goods.

Actually Geoff, the staff were confused by the blue shutter on the pump head module being visible in its closed position... Thinking it was a set clip stuck in it, they called us without actually looking carefully at it! All this and after 8 years of constant IV training too
....should've just taken them out with my M870 Masterkey, but hey, its Christmas!