Introductory Case Study

While trying to develop a low-cost syringe for the developing world context, you (the designer) hit a crossroads. Constructing the syringe to auto-disable after a single use, an important safety feature, significantly adds to the cost of the design – making it potentially unaffordable for some hospitals and clinics. However, if you don’t add the safety feature, you are enabling the potential for the spread of disease. How do you as a designer proceed?

• Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation
  • • The auto-injection feature is an important safety feature
      • Adds cost to the design
      • Product can’t be used for intended community with high cost
    • Without the safety feature of the needle, it could increase the spread of disease
    • Balance question to consider: Is the spread of disease more augmented by decreased cost by not including the feature for more financial access or including it to reduce the risk of spreading?
    • The product must be manufactured properly so the auto-injector always works and it reduces or eliminates the risk of death
• Step 2: Define the Stakeholders
  • • Primary: hospitals & clinics, patients, regulatory body,  manufacturers
    • Secondary: Distributors,  insurance company
• Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders
  • • Hospitals & Clinics: patient safety, drug administration time, easy disposal
    • Patients: easy to use, low cost, and accessible
    • Regulatory Body: No violations in safety or ethics
    • Manufacturers: to make a profit, innovation, company reputation
    • Distributors: to make a profit
    • Insurance Companies: to make a profit
• Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions
• • • Assess if oral administration is a viable option
      • Ethical principal
        • Nonmaleficence
      • Pros:
        • Easily administrable
      • Cons:
        • Not really solving the problem of needle
    • Have both auto-disable and not disabled
      • Ethical principal
        • Autonomy, beneficence
      • Pros:
        •  Having both options available for the consumer to use
      • Cons:
        • May be difficult to use for the consumer
    • Create a reusable device with replaceable syringes and needles
      • Ethical principal
        • Autonomy
      • Pros:
        •  Environmentally friendly
      • Cons:
        • This can be an issue in terms of disease
        • Difficult to enhance clean protocol by replacing the needles each time

• Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate
  • Organizations that can contacted; Formulate a proposition that includes the organization(s)’ mission and ties it to more effective health care and/or preventing the spread of disease
  • Seeking grants from different foundations, NGOs, and INGOs.
  • Seeking governmental help
  • Seeking advice or literature from similar ventures in similar settings
• Step 6: Select the best course of action
  • Find the cheapest, safest, and most durable materials to construct a prototype
  • Create a new design for the auto-injector to replace the auto-disable and the medicine inside
    • Adjust size, shape, and needle disposal technique
  • First, auto-disabled needles come with UV light to sterilize the needle
  • Priority is finding funding to make the auto-retracting syringes financially accessible
• Step 7: (If applicable) What are the implications of your solution on the venture
  • If orally taken, might not be a one-time pill. Instead, taking it for a series of days could be a solution. That would cause a non-adherence to taking the pills on time. Can also cause problems with the stomach and digestion
  • Investors/funders could have mandatory manufacturers or designers to go through as requirements for partnership/sponsorship