Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Design Project
Now all my posts will be on my design project page. This is just a post to forward to another blog. HAPPY SOON TO BE THANKSGIVING!
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Front Page of Business Section Again
"Medical Industry Grumbles, but It Stands to Gain"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/health/policy/09industry.html?scp=1&sq=the%20medical%20industry%20grumbles,%20but%20it%20stands%20to%20gain&st=cseThe front page of the business page of The New York Times once again related to the medical industry. The article was published this Monday. Millions of more Americans would gain medical coverage if the health care reform ever gets through the Senate, but that's another story. The focus of the article is that although the medical industry would gain more "paying customers" (Wilson & Abelson, 2009), it would be subject to more regulation. A graphic from the article is below.
| ||||||
 |  | | ||||
| | |||||
| | |||||
| ||||||
The stipulation for a registry for medical devices relates to the article published Thursday which I mentioned in my previous blog post. I think making this reform into reality will take years (if it ever happens). A registry would benefit patients and doctors.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
the US doesn't have a registry
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/business/05device.html?scp=1&sq=Costs%20Surge%20for%20Medical%20Devices,%20but%20Benefits%20Are%20Opaque%20&st=Search
An article entitled "Costs Surge for Medical Devices, but Benefits Are Opaque" made the front page of the business section of the New York Times this Thursday. I have been meaning to blog about it for a while, but decided to today. Medicare pays millions for costly devices such as implantable defibrillators, artificial joints, and other implants. The US lacks one key thing though: a registry for these devices. Other countries have medical device databases, "to provide both doctors and patients with more data about how competing products differ. In such a database, or a registry, information about a product and the surgical technique used by a doctor is recorded at the time of an implant. And then by tracking whether and when the patients return for a replacement procedure, or experience other problems, registries can show which producers’ models are failing faster than others," (Meier, 2009). Databases would make for more competition.
Medical device companies would not gain anything if there way a registry. Patients would gain better results through the use of the "best" devices. Also implantable defibrillators have battery lives of around 5 years. The article seems to conclude that these devices could be made to have longer battery lives, but companies sell more defibrillators when they have to be replaced every five years. The cell phone industry runs a similar scheme with short battery lives and planned upgrades. Should life saving devices be programmed to fail intentionally? Patients are more than consumers. Operations to replace implantable defibrillators can lead to death. The business of medical devices in the US will soon change.
| ||||||
|  | | ||||
| Lance Murphey/Bloomberg News A researcher at the device maker Medtronic in Memphis examining a spinal system. | | ||||
| | |||||
| ||||||
An article entitled "Costs Surge for Medical Devices, but Benefits Are Opaque" made the front page of the business section of the New York Times this Thursday. I have been meaning to blog about it for a while, but decided to today. Medicare pays millions for costly devices such as implantable defibrillators, artificial joints, and other implants. The US lacks one key thing though: a registry for these devices. Other countries have medical device databases, "to provide both doctors and patients with more data about how competing products differ. In such a database, or a registry, information about a product and the surgical technique used by a doctor is recorded at the time of an implant. And then by tracking whether and when the patients return for a replacement procedure, or experience other problems, registries can show which producers’ models are failing faster than others," (Meier, 2009). Databases would make for more competition.
Medical device companies would not gain anything if there way a registry. Patients would gain better results through the use of the "best" devices. Also implantable defibrillators have battery lives of around 5 years. The article seems to conclude that these devices could be made to have longer battery lives, but companies sell more defibrillators when they have to be replaced every five years. The cell phone industry runs a similar scheme with short battery lives and planned upgrades. Should life saving devices be programmed to fail intentionally? Patients are more than consumers. Operations to replace implantable defibrillators can lead to death. The business of medical devices in the US will soon change.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
actually complete
The paper is in. After researching, analyzing, diagraming, writing, and editing the research paper is done. I learned a lot about a very specific area of tissue engineering, ACL scaffolds. It is an interesting area and I see real potential for that field to expand in the coming years, as is the case with most fields related to bioengineering. I just want to have a way to estimate the success rates of this research. Will it ever be applied to a commercial implantable device, or will it just flitter away? Accepting new techonologies takes time.
As a result of the project, I learned how to read articles from scientific journals as a result of this project. A few months ago I had never read a scientifc journal articles, The Science Times in The New York Times, is not quite the same thing. It was interesting to take information from these scientific journals and translate it into something anyone could understand. The next step is the design project. I currently have zero good ideas, but we'll see what happens in the upcoming weeks.
As a result of the project, I learned how to read articles from scientific journals as a result of this project. A few months ago I had never read a scientifc journal articles, The Science Times in The New York Times, is not quite the same thing. It was interesting to take information from these scientific journals and translate it into something anyone could understand. The next step is the design project. I currently have zero good ideas, but we'll see what happens in the upcoming weeks.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
done... well almost
I just finished my first draft of the paper. It has all the sections described in the assignment. The only thing is I cannot paste a table from a PDF file into word wothout the formatting getting all messed up. I just did not put the tables in the paper, but I will try to get them in by Thursday. The tables are tables of numbers relating to braiding angle, pore size, porosity, tensile strength, maximum load, and other things. I guess having those tables are not completely necessary for the paper. But I did put in some nice diagrams from a New York Times slideshow that clearly display the knee, a torn ACL, a patellar tendon autograft, and some other things. I think it is easier to understand something when you can look at it after reading about it, rather than just reading about it. Just focusing on the one design was enough, I did not have to compare the design with PLAGA to designs with collagen and other biomaterials. Tissue-engineering is a developing field and I think that in the future some kind of ACL tissue scaffold will be used for ACL reconstruction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
