Author: kbc7vn
Final reflections
Although I was kinda nervous when I first heard the assignment, I thought the videos ended up being a great way to showcase each groups’ work on the medical team project. Like many of the reviewers mentioned, the videos allowed for a ton of information to be packed in; much more so that can be included in a PowerPoint presentation. It also took off all of the pressure of presenting on the day of, which made it so I could focus more on the other groups’ videos. I thought every group did an amazing job at showing their entire design process and how they got to their prototype, particularly since almost no one had previous video editing experience. A lot of the groups used the whiteboard approach for some aspect of their video, which I thought worked really well to show each step, as well as the design consideration. I also thought that the time lapse of the prototyping process that Team 5 (Sanaa, Nick, Maddie) did was a really cool, attention-getting way to show the criteria and tools that made up their design. I also thought that Team 2’s (Alex, Casey, Kelly) whiteboard visualization of the change in the inflation was a really clean and straightforward way to show the function of their device. Each group took a different approach with their video, but each one really narrowed in on the important aspects of their project.
Overall, the class ended up being a lot different than what I expected. I thought more of the class was going to be like the last half, where we worked on the Medical Center projects. But even with that, I wasn’t sure what to expect. I didn’t really know much about the whole design process, and I definitely learned a ton about the details and iterations that go behind just coming up with an actual need. I think it would have been better to shorten the PHPs and add moved to the clinical observations and final project sooner so that we would have had more time to go through more iterations and come up with a better prototype. It was definitely different than any other class I have taken. It could be frustrating sometimes when there were only vague guidelines for the projects, but I think that was really needed for a lot of this class, it pushed everyone to think independently and also gave us an idea of what design is really like. In the real world, no one is going to hand you all of the guidelines for some product you want to make. You have to do research, ask questions, and find out for yourself what needs to get done. This class really showed all the time and thought that goes behind every design, and I definitely have a newfound appreciation for any sort of medical device I see.
Putting it all together
Making the video went way better than I was expecting. None of us had any previous experience with video editing, so I was a bit worried how that would go. But after a long day in Clem yesterday, we put it all together and I’m pretty happy with the result. I think the reason why it wasn’t so bad was because of how we organized it and took the time to come up with a good storyboard. We came up with a clear outline and planned out the whole script which really acted like a timeline of our entire design process. We had a complete shift in focus part way through our project and it was essential that we find a way to explain how our need statements evolved. This part wasn’t as easy as we had thought because we realized that doctors are even busier than college students. We had hoped to have interviews with the doctor and physical therapist we had worked with throughout the project, but neither of them could fit this in their schedules. Luckily, Dr. Lunsford was at least able to send us some typed out answers to a couple questions, which we could include as quotes in our video. We were really grateful to have this, since actual quotes and feedback from doctors are one of the best ways to validate our idea as something that could be useful in a hospital. We also found it difficult to fit our work from the past month into just 5 minutes. There’s so much more behind every story, but this was also a learning process that made us pick out only the most important details. So even with the lack of video editing experience and the obstacles in our plan, I think the video worked out great to show our whole design process and hopefully the class enjoys learning about the WalkBox!
Evolving our need statement
Starting out, Jay, Andrew, and I decided to focus on bracing for patients with Cerebral Palsy, specifically ankle-foot orthotics, or AFOs. Based on all of our previous clinical observations, it seemed like there were issues with the time need to make an orthotic (~1 month) when the patient has finally outgrown the device. We learned that there were several pressure points that will experience skin irritation and redness first. This made it seem that the patient would be in pain while wearing the ill-fitting device and waiting for their new AFO. This gave us our first need statement: patients with CP need a way to monitor the fit of the orthotic as they grow. We figured sensors would be a good way to do this – the sensors would keep track of the pressures acting on the brace and when they reached a certain value this would indicate the orthotic no longer fits. So, we proposed this idea to the doctors and physical therapists. What we found out was this isn’t actually a need. Outgrowing the orthotic doesn’t cause much discomfort; some patients don’t even realize they’ve outgrown it. Not only this, sensors wouldn’t be the best way to measure the fit. They usually just check to see if there is any redness and skin irritation, or if the foot is longer than the brace.
We had a second need statement that we ran by them as well. We had noticed that orthotics can be bulky and difficult to fit into shoes. To address this we considered designing a shoe that would better fit the orthotic. We talked with a physical therapist about this and she showed us several companies which have done this same thing. Additionally, minimizing the overall bulkiness of the brace would involve focusing on manufacturing materials that would be strong enough at smaller thicknesses, something that would be out of our scope for this project.
So, taking into account all of the advice from the doctors and physical therapists, we went and looked back at all of our observations. Underlying behind all of these problems was the issue of compliance. If the device is uncomfortable from being outgrown, the patient wouldn’t want to wear it. If the device was too thick and looked weird with their shoes, the patient wouldn’t want to wear it. Compliance is an issue with almost any medical problem. A patient can be prescribed something, but it won’t actually benefit them unless they follow through. In this case, the doctor has no idea whether or not the patient has been wearing their AFO other than self-report. Measuring compliance would allow the doctor to differentiate between whether the orthotic isn’t working or if it is not being worn enough.
This entire process of shifting to a new need statement has really shown me the importance of doing research and talking with clinicians. Their perspective carries so much value, and their input is really what shapes the device to address real, current issues in the hospital.
Katherine Crump – First Post
My name is Katherine Crump and I’m a third year BME student. At UVA, I’m currently doing research in the M3 lab with Dr. Blemker. I’m still not really sure what I want to do when I graduate and I’m just trying to decide whether grad school or going straight into industry would be the best fit for me. I feel like this class will be a great opportunity to gain clinical experience and learn a lot about the design process. I would love to be able come out of this class having some design or prototype that can really help patients.
BME Design 