Medical Device Defect Prediction With Feedback-Based Model Training

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for predicting medical device defects are inefficient, often requiring multiple devices to be kept available, leading to reduced patient care capacity and potential treatment postponements due to complex error conditions that require specialized expertise for diagnosis.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method for training a model to predict medical device defects, which includes predicting future error states, determining complexity, and adjusting parameters based on actual operating states, using a feedback loop that considers the capability profile of the recipient, and utilizing multiple sub-models for detailed probability predictions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If multiple functional medical devices are maintained to ensure patient care continuity, then device availability and safety are improved, but patient treatment capacity is reduced due to fewer devices available for simultaneous treatments

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice availabilityVSAvoidpatient treatment capacity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary analysis of operating parameters and sensor data to predict potential faults before they occur. By identifying degradation trends early, the system enables proactive maintenance scheduling that prevents unexpected failures without requiring excessive backup devices, thus maintaining treatment capacity while ensuring device availability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors operating parameters through sensors and provides feedback loops that track device health status. This real-time feedback enables dynamic adjustment of maintenance schedules and early warning of potential failures, allowing optimized device utilization where fewer devices are needed for backup while maintaining high availability through predictive intervention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Measurement precision

If complex error conditions are analyzed by experienced service technicians, then accurate fault diagnosis is achieved, but maintenance efficiency is reduced due to the need for specialized expertise and manual analysis

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefault diagnosis accuracyVSAvoidmaintenance efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-diagnosis by automatically analyzing operating parameters and sensor data to identify fault conditions. The anomaly detection algorithms and pattern recognition capabilities enable the device to diagnose its own issues without requiring external expert intervention, thus maintaining high diagnostic accuracy while significantly improving maintenance efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces manual analysis by service technicians with automated computational analysis using machine learning algorithms and anomaly detection systems. This substitution of human expertise with computational methods maintains diagnostic accuracy while eliminating the time and resource constraints associated with manual fault analysis.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Ease of operation

If visual inspection or operating parameter analysis is used for fault detection, then the process is simple and quick, but fault understanding is insufficient for complex error conditions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefault detection simplicityVSAvoidfault cause understanding
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The system merges multiple data sources including visual inspection data, operating parameters, sensor readings, and historical maintenance records into a unified analysis framework. This combination allows the system to maintain the simplicity of basic inspection methods while enriching the analysis with additional data dimensions to achieve comprehensive fault understanding for complex error conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The system adds temporal and contextual dimensions to fault analysis by incorporating historical operating data, trend analysis, and pattern recognition. This multi-dimensional approach transforms simple parameter checking into comprehensive diagnostic capability, enabling deep fault understanding while maintaining ease of operation through automated analysis.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Data Source

PatentEP4451078A1Feedback-based prediction of medical device defects
Publication Date: 2024.10.23 FRESENIUS MEDICAL CARE DEUTSCHLAND GMBH
  • EP4451078A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4451078A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4451078A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The present disclosure relates to a computer-implemented method for training a model to predict medical device defects, comprising the following steps: predicting, by the model, a future failure state of a medical device based on a current operating state of the medical device; determining a complexity of the predicted failure state; transmitting the predicted failure state to a receiver based at least partially on the complexity of the predicted failure state; receiving information about an actual operating state of the medical device; and adjusting a set of parameters of the model (130) based at least partially on the information about the actual operating state and the predicted failure state of the medical device.Furthermore, a corresponding method for predicting medical device defects, a model for predicting medical device defects, a data processing device, and a computer program are disclosed.