Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byRandell Maxwell Modified over 9 years ago
1
Trey DeLong Lacey Gorochow Brian Rappa Adam Vandergriff Sandra Wadeer Advisor: Dave Martinez VP of Sales at Zimmer, Inc.
2
Problem Statement Current tissue retractors are narrow, multiple retractors are required especially in obese patients NY times reports 34% adults are obese +Surgical Techs($20.00/hr*2-4hr/surgery*200k surgeries/year) Time of surgery increases as well Previous team designed an adjustable retractor Complex and impractical for industrial production Prototype could not be used in surgery
3
Mechanism & Consequences Mechanism causing the problem Physical properties of adipose tissue allow it to wrap around narrow retractors Consequences of unresolved problem Poor surgical field of vision Increase cost for additional materials and personnel
4
Conflict Map
5
Adaptor Design Requirements Must fit multiple patient sizes and provide a clear view of the surgical site Must be cost efficient Must function adequately in the surgical procedure Be able to be sterilized Strong enough to hold back fat tissue
6
Ideal Device Easy to use Small size Simple design- easy to manufacture Lightweight Biocompatible
7
Primary Objectives Design a modular adaptor for retractors that: Keeps back adipose tissue Is easily used by surgeon Attachment technique Is simple to manufacture Use cheap material & Production method Is ready for use in surgery Easily sterilized One time use
8
Preliminary Design 1 Wing-like structure ≈ 5 inches 10 inch single incision Attachment mechanism: Hook and slot Tapering method 1-1.5 in. wide Form by bending metal Non-disposable Stainless steel
9
Design 2 Disposable Plastic material Attaches to retractor Multiple sizes Requires holding
10
Design 3 Similar to cheek retractor Plastic material Disposable Hands-free
11
Goals Reduce total hip replacement surgery cost Less personnel in the operating room Less retractors needed for surgery Increase vision and work room for the surgeon Increase efficiency of the surgery Reduce surgery time
12
Performance Metrics Retractor system work on 95% of patients Different size attachments for non-disposable and disposable design Costs Keep production costs minimal ○ Mass production ○ Readily machined Predicted to be ~$300 for retractor and attachments (non-disposable) Disposable: $1-$10 per device
13
System and Environment Role in surgery Increase view of region and allows access Why its beneficial to the surgeon Reduce people near patient Reduce number of retractors Make surgery easier
14
Testing Methods Verification Validation Hardware Testing Stress Testing Pro/E Mechanical Analysis Safety Testing
15
Next Steps…
16
References http://www.bls.gov/bls/blswage.htm http://www.bls.gov/bls/blswage.htm http://www.innomed.net/hip_rets_mis.ht m#Anchor-APC-49575 http://www.innomed.net/hip_rets_mis.ht m#Anchor-APC-49575 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/14/heal th/14obese.html http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/14/heal th/14obese.html http://www.orthosupersite.com/view.aspx ?rid=1889 http://www.orthosupersite.com/view.aspx ?rid=1889 http://www.zimmer.com/z/ctl/op/global/ac tion/1/id/8140/template/PC/navid/10427 http://www.zimmer.com/z/ctl/op/global/ac tion/1/id/8140/template/PC/navid/10427
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.