Finger-Worn Bite Block for Oral Procedure Safety

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional bite blocks are inadequate for protecting medical professionals' fingers during oral procedures, especially when patients are unable to control their jaw muscles or have an endotracheal tube in place, as they do not allow for the passage of equipment and can be impractical in critical care settings.

Innovation Solution

A finger-worn oral procedure apparatus, also known as a 'finger-worn bite block,' which is designed to be worn on the finger of a medical professional. This apparatus includes a tubular member and a flange, allowing for the accommodation of a finger while preventing the apparatus from being swallowed by the patient. The tubular member is resilient enough to protect the finger from biting forces and is sized to fit between the joints of the finger, allowing for natural movement.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If conventional bite blocks are used to protect equipment, then equipment protection is improved, but finger protection of medical professionals deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveequipment protectionVSAvoidfinger biting injury risk
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent inverts the conventional bite block design by making the bite block finger-worn rather than equipment-mounted. The resilient member is positioned on the medical professional's finger to directly absorb bite forces, reversing the traditional approach where equipment was protected but fingers remained vulnerable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Solution Approach 2:

The resilient member acts as an intermediary between the patient's teeth and the medical professional's finger. It absorbs and dissipates bite forces through its resilient properties, protecting the finger while allowing equipment to pass through the apparatus without direct contact with the biting surface.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Strength

If conventional bite blocks are designed to protect equipment, then equipment safety is improved, but ease of operation deteriorates due to inability to pass equipment through

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveequipment safetyVSAvoidequipment passage capability
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The bite block apparatus is segmented into distinct functional zones: a resilient member for bite absorption, a flange for positioning, and an open structure that allows equipment passage. This segmentation enables simultaneous equipment protection and operational access.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The apparatus serves multiple functions: protecting the finger from biting, allowing equipment to pass through, maintaining patient airway access, and providing structural support. The resilient member specifically enables both protection and passage by absorbing forces while maintaining an open channel.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Object-affected harmful factors

If bite blocks are made resilient to protect from biting, then finger protection is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebite force resistanceVSAvoidapparatus structure
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The resilient member functions as a flexible protective element that absorbs bite forces through elastic deformation. This flexible shell approach provides effective bite protection without requiring complex mechanical structures, keeping the overall apparatus simple while delivering the needed protective function.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #30Flexible shells and thin films

4Ease of operation

If bite blocks are designed with openings for equipment passage, then ease of operation is improved, but protection capability deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveequipment accessibilityVSAvoidbite protection effectiveness
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The apparatus exhibits local quality differentiation: the resilient member provides concentrated bite force absorption at the contact point, while the flange and surrounding structure provide structural support and positioning. This localized protection maintains effectiveness even with openings for equipment passage elsewhere in the structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The finger-worn oral procedure apparatus effectively protects the medical professional's finger from biting injuries while allowing for the passage of equipment and natural finger movement, making it suitable for use in various oral procedures, including those in critical care settings.

Implementation Method 1

The tubular member is formed from a material resilient against a bite from the mouth of the patient

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectElasticity: Elasticity

Data Source

PatentUS20250049527A1Finger-worn oral procedure apparatus and method
Publication Date: 2025.02.13 BUHARI CYRUS DR
  • US20250049527A1 patent drawing
  • US20250049527A1 patent drawing
  • US20250049527A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A device and methods for making and using an oral procedure apparatus include a tubular member and a flange. The tubular member forms a lumen extending from a first end of the tubular member to a second end of the tubular member, the lumen having a lumen cross-section sized to admit a human finger extending through the lumen, the tubular member having a tubular cross-section sized to be admitted into a mouth of a patient, the tubular member formed from a material substantially resilient against a bite from the mouth of the patient. The flange is coupled to the first end of the tubular member, the flange having a flange cross-section sized larger than the mouth of the patient.