TTP
Dr Michelle Griffin discusses TTP’s response to the government’s Ventilator Challenge: the CoVent
hen the pandemic arrived and the government launched the Ventilator Challenge, we knew
staff needed to learn to use the device despite not being specialists in caring for patients requiring ventilation. But while we had some indications of the health problems of Covid-19 patients from other countries, there was neither a standard ventilation protocol for Covid-19 patients, nor a blueprint for a new ventilator that would meet their needs in the UK context. To respond to this challenge, we expanded TTP’s clinical network to bring in the necessary medical expertise and real-world evidence to inform the design of our ventilator. This included intensive care doctors and anaesthetists with specialist experience of treating Covid-19 patients. Along with the government’s clinical group and Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), our clinical network advised us on what was required to meet the needs of both patients and clinicians. Equally, we had to ensure that the ventilator we were creating met the requirements of the MHRA for approval for use, as well as ensuring it could be used by clinicians without specialist
we had to design a new ventilator rapidly. But amid the unfolding pandemic, the clinical needs of Covid-19 patients and the requirements for a UK pandemic ventilator were far from clear. So, as a clinician and technologist at TTP, I began to clarify the needs of patients and what this meant for our ventilator, dubbed ‘CoVent’. This quickly expanded into a role spanning the consortium of Cambridge technology companies responding to the Ventilator Challenge. We knew that ventilators needed to be ready for deployment in the NHS within weeks, and therefore had to be designed using only readily available parts. In the world of medical device development, where such a project typically takes three to five years, this challenge verged on the impossible. In addition, the government’s call was for a device that would be intuitive to use. This was for the worst case scenario, where severe Covid-19 cases exceeded NHS capacity and healthcare
experience in helping patients with critical respiratory problems. As plans for Nightingale Hospitals were being drawn up, and former healthcare professionals – like me – called to return to the NHS, it was crucial to understand the likely skill level and experience of clinical users, and the environment they would be working in. We got feedback from frontline clinicians during lockdown by means of video calls, where we showed them our designs. Engineers and designers on the call worked in real time to implement their feedback. Only when the first prototype devices were assembled did we conduct socially distanced in-person user testing of CoVent. Thankfully, nationwide social distancing suppressed the virus and new ventilators weren’t needed, though the CoVent production line at our manufacturer, Dyson, was being readied as cases peaked in April. Still, the Ventilator Challenge had a lasting impact on our work at TTP. More than ever, we recognise the importance of input from working clinicians from the beginning and throughout product development. Our clinical network provides rapid and frequent insight from working doctors and nurses into how a disease is currently treated, variations in clinical practice, who is the likely user of a medical device and whether the clinical and market need is likely to change. The Ventilator Challenge reminds us that if you always think in these terms, clinician input will lead you to a better product. Read more blogs on lessons from the Ventilator Challenge for product and technology development at ttp.com/insight
ABOVE TTP’s CoVent uses only readily available par ts and was designed to be intuitive to use
More than ever, we recognise the importance of input fromworking clinicians from the beginning and throughout product development"
13
ISSUE 07
cambridgecatalyst .co.uk
Powered by FlippingBook