EBME Forums Forums Maintenance Technical Assistance Medfusion 3500 Data Communication Module manual

Hello Folks,
I am looking for Data communication module manual for the Medfusion 3500 infusion pump. It has an Ir-rs232 interface but I don't know what the data output looks like. I'd appreciate all the help I can get.

Cheers
Tim

Hello Tim

As you may be aware, the User Manual mentions the "Medex Serial Conversion Box". I've never come across one of those, but I assume that it plugs into the back of the 3500 and outputs to a standard RS-232 connector (... and from there to a PC etc.).

The manual also mentions "specific details on the serial interface protocol are provided with the conversion box"!

So ... do you have the Magic Box?

Also ... Cerner et al do not mention the Medfusion 3500, as far as I can tell.

Hello Geoff,
We have ordered the " Magic Box", however I have been told that there is a third manual that provides details on the data communication protocol, setup etc. Trying to write some code that will extract the data and then save it for further analysis.

Cerener has a proprietary device integration system known as Careware. I am not sure if they have developed device driver for the Medfusion 3500 or for any other infusion pump per say.

Cheers
Tim

I think the original name was Graseby 3500.
Cheers
Tim

I expect (and hope) that the manual comes with the box.

I have heard of CareAware ... but there seems to be a new "medical equipment bus" arriving almost every week!

And of course they are all trying to make money out of them. So we have incompatibility ... and expense!

I would prefer a more general approach. Given a few tools (some leads, a break-out box, a 'scope maybe, a PC or laptop with various "comms" programs, etc.), surely all this stuff can't be that esoteric? It's only data, after all.

As long as it can be captured, it can be studied. And once it can be studied, it can worked on (imported, processed, whatever).

Lastly, there's a lot of information on the Cerner pages, if you have the time to wade through it all.

PS: the Medfusion 3500 and Graseby 3500 are completely different syringe pumps - as may be seen here. Yes, I agree, it might have been a good idea to have used different model numbers!

Geoff,
Medical Device Interoperability and integration has been a long difficult battle that hospitals have been dealing with medical device manufacturers. The problem is that the I/O data from every device is proprietary. Very few are using HL7 2.X or IEEE 11073 or X73 protocol to provide standardized data output.
There are many middleware sw companies that provide some sort of interfacing between medical devices and HIS/EMR systems but they come at a higher cost. These are as follows:

1. Nuvon
2. iSirona
3. Capsuletech
4. Cerner
to name a few.

We are in the process for develop Agnostic device drivers which can be PlugNPlay. But we have limited resources to develop drivers and provide a complete agnostic system available to the public.

Problem is that everyone wants it FREE but no one wants to contribute. Meaning we need engineers, sw developers etc to help us in the SDLC process.

This is no ordinary feat to take and it needs support from the academic institutes, private and govt hospitals etc to help and guide us. Otherwise you will always be under the mercy of these third part integrator.

It would be nice to see some participation from the NHS hospials and UK academic universities to support us in this long term ailing problem.

Cheers
Tim

That's because many (most) of them were designed before the likes of HL-7 arrived on the scene.

In short - there has to be an interface.

Only now we seem to be moving on from "every manufacturer doing their own thing" to "every hospital doing their own thing". OK as far as it goes, perhaps ... until a few years down the road when hospitals amalgamate, kit gets sold ... or yet another Standard gets imposed from Those On High.

But before going further, can anyone take a step back and remind me just why all the kit has to be connected (data-wise)? Is the aim "just" to record settings, performance, timings etc. on some sort of central system (that can then send out messages to the Smart Devices in medics' pockets ... or whatever) - or is it to enable equipment to talk to one-another. In either case, why?

If it's all aimed at the EMR (Electronic Patient Record), what data actually needs to be recorded there? The serial (asset) number of the pump, the drug(s) infused, flow-rates, timings - or what, exactly? Surely such "protocols" (requirements) shall vary from hospital to hospital. What's wrong with the Written Patient Record?

If all equipment data is to be recorded in real time (more or less); how much is enough? How long is it to be kept (how many stacks of hard-drives will we need)? And - more importantly - who is going to analyze it all?

If the reason is for recalling histories in the event of "incidents" - well, most (all modern) infusion pumps (the most likely culprit) already do all that, surely?

Yes, it's interesting technically ... but is it just more "gee-whiz" technology (and expense) - or is there a Real Need?

As I've said many times before, just because technology allows us to do things, it doesn't necessarily follow that we all have to do them. In the UK, at least, the money involved could undoubtedly be better spent elsewhere within healthcare. Please discuss!

Sounds kind of familiar.

But don't worry, Tim ... it seems to me that there will always be a role for the independent multi-skilled technician in all this. At some stage each guy has to decide whether he wants to be a contributor (developer, experimenter, innovator, integrator, designer ... whatever) or just follow on as one of the Common Herd.