1. Group 10: Azni Wahid Naziha Lazim Zul Zolkafly Mohamed Osman Hassan Atassi

2. Dave Martinez  VP Sales Zimmer  Mechanical Engineer Dr. Michael Christie  Orthopedic Surgeon- Southern Joint Replacement Institute  Holds Design Patents

3.  Surgical instrument by which a surgeon can: actively separate the edges of a surgical incision or wound hold back underlying organs and tissues  Allows for: Smaller incision Greater working area  Available in many shapes/sizes

5.  Wide Variety of retractors available for hip surgery Choice depends surgeons training/ patient  Size of Patient  Point in time in surgery

6.  Retractors are made of surgical stainless steel  Average Duration of Hold: 15.5 Minutes  Forces: Maximum: 48.8N Average: 9N

7. RetractorCost Aufranc Cobra Retractor$314 Ischium Retractor$825 Sofield Retractor$360 Femoral Elevator$975 Hohmann Retractor$422 Richardson Retractor$485 Hibbs Retractor$300 Average Cost Per Set$4,820 To service 10 hip surgeries per day a minimum of 8 sets needed. Total cost: $38,560

8. ModelOverall Length Handle Length Blade Depth Blade Width Standard8.75”8”3”1.5” Medium10.75”9.75”4.5”1.5” Extra Large 14.25”13”6.5”1.5”

9. 1. Multiple versions of same retractor needed to do the same job because of varying patient size 1. Increase cost 2. Increase Storage space 2. Limited Size Permutations: never exact fit to patient size 1. Decreased surgeon field of view (too large) 2. Ineffective & causes injury (too small) 3. Obese Patients 1. Adipose tissue wraps around retractor  inefficiencies 2. Hip retractors being used in knee surgery 4. Uncomfortable Handle 1. Average user changes hand positions every 71 seconds 2. Results in abrupt movement of retractor blade  increases chance for injury & length of recovery

10.  Characteristics Alterable Handle length & Blade Depth Interchangeable handle types and blades Ergonomic Handle Adipose blade accessory

11.  We propose a mechanism in order to alter the handle length and blade depth to any potential need Current Standards averages three version of a given retractor of various dimension Our solution allows for much more  Customizable to exact patient dimension  Optimized surgical view  Ideal length to retract exact amount of tissue 3 retractors  1  Less number of tools  Potential Cost decrease

12.  New handle design to optimize comfort Potential for multiple handles to be designed in future based on user preferences

13.  Various types of tips are used based on need of surgery & surgeon preference Various tips can be manufactured  Surgical Staff (retractor user) have different perceptions of comfort Various Handles Can be Manufactured  Example: 5 tips + 5 handles= 25 retractors  Separating the two components allows for 10 components instead of 25

14.  31% of Americans are classified as ‘obese’  Obesity rising by 2% per year  3-4 fold increase of obese patients requiring Hip replacement  Proposed Solution: An additional accessory to be added to retractor when operating on obese tissue to handle the increase of adipose tissue

15.  Proof of concept designed modeled with: Interchangeable & adjustable tip Interchangeable & adjustable handle Adipose Accessory  Additional tips and handles can be designed in future

16. Alterable Handle length & Blade Depth Detachable adipose blade HANDLE BLADE ADIPOSE BLADE

17. Unlock Lock HANDLE BLADE BODY 1) 2) 3) 4) Blade Body Slot/groove

19.  Minor tweaks to locking mechanism  Determine Dimensions Stress-Strain Analyss  Protoype