Comments for GLOBAL HEALTH INNOVATION BLOG

Comment on The JaipurKnee Project II – Scaling Up the Business by Masood Ahmed Shaikh

Masood Ahmed Shaikh — Mon, 06 May 2013 13:58:13 +0000

We started the Jaipur Foot in Pakistan with the assistance from Jaipur, bringing all materials from India. I also started to improvise the modular system as has been done by the Chinese basedon western designs. What the Chinese were doing for $100 we did it for $30. The basic cost of all components is hardly one third of the total cost. It is the cost of investment in tooling and design. In Pakistan we could produce this joint for $10 or less. I am willing to invest in tools and moulds and willing to provide free of cost a limited number of components. If some entrepreneur is willing to make benevolent investments nothing is impossible. Masood Ahmed Shaikh. Past President Rotary Club of Karachi, Pakistan.

Comment on The JaipurKnee Project I – Getting the Need Right by Prakash Dugar, Chennai, India

Prakash Dugar, Chennai, India — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:50:21 +0000

I did explain to BMVSS the problems faced by me in balancing with the Stanford 4 Bar Knee Joint. However, they didn’t recognize this as an alignment issue. It looks as if the Stanford 4 Bar Knee Joint Prosthesis has been introduced with out proper and adequate trials and training to the Prosthetists. With due respect, I don’t think the Jaipur Foot itself is suited to such a prosthesis. As against a Sach Foot used in a single axis prosthesis, the design of the jaipur foot, is not conducive to knee stability. Jaipur is more than 2000 Kms. away from Chennai and it is too expensive and unpractical to go back. Even if the prosthesis is provided free, there is the cost of travel, stay, and time required. I was in Jaipur for a week, and during the trials they kept repeating that I have to push back the knee joint to lock it, and to prevent it from buckling. I had emailed them too, explaining the problems faced by me, and to date, there is no reply from them. The ultimate test for any prosthesis is that whether an amputee can walk with it securely and comfortably. Whether the Stanford 4 Bar Knee Joint Prosthesis in its present design passes this test? My answer is ‘No’.

Comment on The JaipurKnee Project II – Scaling Up the Business by Sohail Gupta

Sohail Gupta — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 08:20:32 +0000

My view on the questions is -
What are the pros and cons of a for-profit strategy for addressing global health needs?
Everyone does it for profit. The point is how much is the profit and who is paying for it. Basic healthcare needs are not like luxury products for which no one shall help you financially. In that light, it is but obvious for the customer to go seek that help. In such market dynamics, it is inevitable for you too to source your profit if any from them (the donation makers). But if you focus on the richer customer segment, this might not hold true for them as they would need the best health service and are willing to pay for it. A broader product portfolio should be helpful in this regard, with a cheaper (also less profitable) prototype that should be ‘subsidized’ by noble organisations.

What advice can you offer ReMotion as it attempts to build networks of smaller clinics to make joint purchasing decisions?
It seems to me more like a branding strategy, which would follow higher prices. If you can convince your customers for it then it should work, however as replied above it would be tough.

What other strategies might the ReMotion team consider to help scale-up the business?
As mentioned above, expanding product portfolio should help in my opinion.

Really appreciate the effort, wish I could be a part of it.

Comment on The JaipurKnee Project I – Getting the Need Right by Vin Narayan

Vin Narayan — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 00:45:27 +0000

Dear Mr. Dugar,
It sounds like what you experienced was due to improper alignment (the way the knee was positioned in relation to your socket). With the knee properly aligned, you should not need to push the knee joint backwards at all while standing. This is true both for a single-axis joint and for the JaipurKnee. As you mentioned, the real advantage of polycentric knee joints, like the JaipurKnee, is seen during walking. A single-axis knee requires many patients to push backwards when the heel of the prosthetic foot hits the ground while walking. With a properly aligned JaipurKnee, the average patient would not need to push backwards at all in that same situation. The most important thing is that each patient has a prosthesis that works well for them, but if you’d like, one solution would be to visit the prosthetists at BMVSS and request that they correct the alignment.

Comment on The JaipurKnee Project I – Getting the Need Right by Prakash Dugar, Chennai, India

Prakash Dugar, Chennai, India — Fri, 15 Mar 2013 13:30:18 +0000

Being an Above Knee amputee, I recently tried a prosthesis fitted with the Stanford Four Bar Linkage Knee Joint. While walking with it was good, stability on stopping after a walk and stability in the standing position was very low. Twice I lost balance for no apparent reason with my body falling in the backward direction, not giving me any chance to restrain the fall or balance the body on the palms of the hands. The prosthetist explained that to stabilize the knee joint after a walk etc. I had to manually push the knee joint backwards, which sounded very impractical and risky to me. I have since then, gone back to my Single Axis Prosthesis which stabilizes much more easily while stopping, standing, or after a climb down from stairs.

Comment on Gradian I: Spinning Out a Commercial Entity from a Nonprofit Foundation by Gradian I: Spinning Out a Commercial Entity from a Nonprofit Foundation « Gradian Health Systems Blog

Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:50:24 +0000

[...] Gradian I: Spinning Out a Commercial Entity from a Nonprofit Foundation [...]

Comment on The JaipurKnee Project I – Getting the Need Right by lyndenend

lyndenend — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 18:29:25 +0000

Thank you for your post. We agree that academic honesty is essential. However, the Stanford team was able to provide documentation that it independently thought of the JaipurKnee concept. Importantly, the focus of these blog posts (and the Innovation Global Health Insight Series they’re drawn from) is to share lessons and insights that might help other innovators succeed at the difficult task of developing and commercializing medical products and services targeted at populations in low-resource settings. It’s our belief that the JaipurKnee stories are instructive in this manner. If you have any further questions about the history between the JaipurKnee and LeTourneau, please contact Vin Narayan, Product Manager at D-Rev. His email is vnarayan@d-rev.org.

Comment on The JaipurKnee Project I – Getting the Need Right by Misty Oneal

Misty Oneal — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 23:50:50 +0000

Did the Stanford team admit that they has seen a knee developed by LIMBS International (limbs.org) (formerly LEGS at LeTourneau University) that they basically replicated? Academic honesty is an issue here … read … this https://files-43728e47-54b8-4b5e-a3dc-d55204f9509d.s3.amazonaws.com/che_article_published_nov_22_by_katie_mangan_-_formatted.pdf

Comment on SafePoint II – Sustaining Adoption by Development Channel » Emerging Voices: Stefanos Zenios and Lyn Denend on Low-Cost Healthcare Innovations

Mon, 23 Jul 2012 20:10:29 +0000

[...] to proactively align stakeholders around the adoption of a health solution. For example, when the SafePoint Trust sought to bring low-cost auto-disable (AD) syringes to Tanzania to stop the spread of blood-borne [...]

Comment on About the Blog by lyndenend

lyndenend — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:55:34 +0000

Thanks, Eric! I will follow up with you directly.