Medical Fluid Delivery Servicing With Performance-Based Replacement Limits

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing medical fluid delivery machines face challenges in efficiently managing the servicing of components, leading to excessive costs, downtime, and disruption in treatment schedules due to inadequate replacement timing of components, which can be either too frequent or delayed, impacting patient care and operational efficiency.

Innovation Solution

A servicing regime that analyzes self-test data and performance metrics for each component, setting soft and replacement limits to optimize component replacement timing, incorporating visual and audio alerts, and remote monitoring to ensure timely and efficient component management.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If component replacement is performed frequently to ensure reliability, then system reliability is improved, but operational costs and downtime increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomponent reliabilityVSAvoiddowntime
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system continuously monitors component performance parameters (pressure differential, flow rate, temperature) and uses this feedback to determine optimal replacement timing. The controller compares actual performance against baseline values and triggers replacement only when degradation exceeds predetermined thresholds, avoiding both premature and delayed replacement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary assessments by monitoring component performance trends over time and predicting future failure points. By identifying components that are approaching failure thresholds before actual failure occurs, the system schedules replacements during planned maintenance windows rather than during unexpected failures, minimizing downtime.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Loss of substance

If component replacement is delayed to reduce costs, then operational costs are reduced, but system reliability and treatment continuity deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperational costsVSAvoidtreatment continuity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of substanceVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses real-time performance monitoring to provide feedback on component health status. By continuously tracking parameters such as pressure differential across filters and membranes, flow rates, and temperature variations, the system can accurately assess when components are degrading and schedule replacements at the optimal moment to balance cost and reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces manual inspection and scheduled replacement with automated electronic monitoring and intelligent decision-making algorithms. Sensors continuously measure component performance, and the controller automatically determines replacement timing based on analyzed data, eliminating the need for conservative scheduled replacements while ensuring reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Device complexity

If manual monitoring and replacement scheduling is used, then system complexity is reduced, but productivity and servicing efficiency decrease

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveservicing system complexityVSAvoidservicing efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-diagnosis and self-monitoring by automatically tracking component performance parameters and identifying when replacement is needed. The controller generates alerts and notifications to schedule maintenance, eliminating the need for manual inspection and assessment, thereby improving servicing efficiency without significantly increasing complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

Manual monitoring and decision-making processes are replaced with automated electronic sensors, data acquisition systems, and analytical algorithms. The system automatically collects performance data, analyzes trends, and determines optimal replacement timing, significantly improving productivity while keeping the added complexity manageable through modular architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Loss of time

If extensive performance monitoring and analysis systems are implemented, then component replacement timing is optimized, but device complexity and initial costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereplacement timing accuracyVSAvoidmonitoring system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The monitoring system is divided into modular functional segments: sensor modules for data collection, processing modules for analysis, and control modules for decision-making. Each module performs a specific function and can be independently configured, allowing the system to achieve high replacement timing accuracy while managing complexity through modular design that can be scaled based on needs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentEP3520003B1Medical fluid therapy machine including servicing regime therefore
Publication Date: 2025.08.13 VANTIVE US HEALTHCARE LLC
  • EP3520003B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3520003B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3520003B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A medical fluid delivery system includes: a medical fluid delivery machine including a component having at least one of associated output data or associated test data; at least one of a (i) component output replacement limit and a component output soft limit for the component or (ii) a component testing replacement limit or a component testing soft limit for the component; and a computer programmed to store at least one of (i) or (ii), and for (i) analyze the output data to provide a first indication of how well the component is performing relative to the component output replacement limit and the component output soft limit, and for (ii) analyze the test data to provide a second indication of how well the at least one component is testing relative to the component testing replacement limit and the component testing soft limit.