Unified Diagnostic Interface for Simultaneous Multi-Engine Testing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Point of care systems with single diagnostic engines and user interfaces are limited to single-user, single-test operations, leading to unnecessary costs and space usage, and require complete system replacement for upgrades or component failures.
Innovation Solution
A point of care system comprising multiple diagnostic engines connected to an instrument data manager (IDM) for simultaneous multi-user testing, with a single user interface managing results from various diagnostic engines, allowing upgrades and component replacements without affecting the interface.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If a single diagnostic engine and user interface are used, then the system is simple and cost-effective, but it limits testing to single-user, single-test operations
Solution Approach 1:
The user interface is designed as a universal platform that can manage multiple diagnostic engines of different types (blood gas, cardiac, coagulation, diabetes, urinalysis) through a single interface. This multi-functional design allows the same interface to control diverse diagnostic engines, enabling simultaneous multi-user testing while avoiding the need for separate interfaces for each engine type.
Solution Approach 2:
The system is segmented into independent diagnostic engines that can be individually connected to the central user interface. Each diagnostic engine operates as a separate module, allowing selective connection and disconnection without affecting other engines. This segmentation enables the system to scale productivity by adding engines while maintaining manageable complexity through modular architecture.
2Productivity
If multiple diagnostic engines are added to enable simultaneous multi-user testing, then testing capacity increases, but system complexity and cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
Multiple diagnostic engines are merged into a single managed system through the central user interface. Instead of each engine having its own independent interface and control system, all engines are combined under one unified interface that coordinates their operation. This merging approach enables simultaneous multi-user testing capability while reducing overall system complexity by eliminating redundant interfaces and control mechanisms.
Solution Approach 2:
The user interface acts as an intermediary between multiple diagnostic engines and the users. Rather than requiring direct connections between each user and each engine, the interface mediates communication and control, allowing users to access any engine through a single point of interaction. This intermediary approach simplifies system architecture by centralizing control logic and reducing the number of direct component interactions.
3Reliability
If the user interface is integrated with specific diagnostic engines, then the interface is optimized for those engines, but complete system replacement is required for upgrades or component failures
Solution Approach 1:
The system architecture is designed dynamically rather than statically, allowing diagnostic engines to be dynamically added, removed, or upgraded without requiring complete system replacement. The user interface maintains dynamic connections to engines through standardized interfaces, enabling flexible reconfiguration. This dynamic design ensures system continuity during upgrades or failures while maintaining ease of manufacture through modular components.
Solution Approach 2:
The user interface is pre-configured with universal communication protocols and connection frameworks that enable future engine additions without requiring redesign. Standardized connection templates and pre-established communication protocols allow new engines to be integrated in advance through straightforward configuration rather than complete system replacement. This preliminary preparation maintains reliability through planned architecture while improving upgrade flexibility.
4Adaptability or versatility
If separate user interfaces are provided for each diagnostic engine, then each engine can be optimized, but costs and space usage increase unnecessarily
Solution Approach 1:
A single user interface is designed with universal capabilities to manage multiple diagnostic engine types through standardized protocols. The interface incorporates engine-specific optimization features within its universal framework, allowing it to adapt to different engine requirements without requiring separate physical interfaces for each engine. This universality reduces space requirements while maintaining the ability to optimize for specific engine types through software configuration.
Data Source
AI summary
A point of care system may comprise a plurality of diagnostic engines and an IDM in electronic communication with each of the plurality of diagnostic engines. Each of the plurality of diagnostic engines may perform testing on a sample inserted into the diagnostic engine. The IDM may be configured to communicate with each of the plurality of diagnostic engines to enable a plurality of tests to be performed on multiple different samples substantially simultaneously by a plurality of users using the plurality of diagnostic engines and to present a single user interface for managing testing by the plurality of diagnostic engines and for receiving the results of tests performed by each of the plurality of diagnostic engines.