Slashdot Mirror
Cheap, Portable Ultrasound Could a Be Lifesaver .
ericjones12398 writes "Every year, around 250,000 women die due to complications from pregnancy and childbirth. New research developing cheap, portable ultrasounds could help reduce that number. From the article: 'Although diagnostic imaging is scarce in much of the developing world (mostly related to cost and portability), ultrasound imaging is a feasible technology for prototyping in low-resource settings such as developing countries. Indeed, many notable technology giants, such as GE and Siemens, are working on low-cost portable ultrasound models. GE’s Vscan is a handheld, pocket-sized visualization tool that allows for non-invasive ultrasounds. Mobisante, a startup in Seattle, takes portable ultrasound technology one step further with the MobiUS SP1 system, an ultrasound that wirelessly connects to the Internet or a smartphone for viewing results at an affordable price tag. By comparison, the large, clunky ultrasound machine most people associate with hospitals can cost anywhere from $32,000-$160,000.'"
So you know when it's the time to run away.
Ba-dum-ttsshhh
It could also increase the number of gender-specific abortions.
Education so they don't get knocked up in the first place. I'm not sure how you address famine by increasing the rates of overpopulation.
Gizmodo has it:
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Cost is not the only issue. Ultrasound equipment is severely regulated in some countries because it is used for gender identification that results in selective abortions. When my wife was pregnant in Shanghai, we had to go to a special hospital for foreigners to get an ultrasound.
"GE’s Vscan is a handheld, pocket-sized visualization tool that allows for non-invasive ultrasounds."
I can only imagine the military-grade ultrasound cannon required for an invasive ultrasound exam.
none
I used to work for an ophthalamic ultrasound company. The hardware itself doesn't need to be expensive if you want basic functionality; it can be done in a USB-attachable box and run on any Windows machine. What makes devices like this expensive is the FDA (and it's equivalent agencies in non-U.S. countries) and all the extensive testing that needs to be done before they'll approve the device for sale. For ophthalamic ultrasound, I believe it cost something on the order of $50000US to perform all the testing that the FDA required before it could be legally sold. Other countries would require their own testing. All of this ends up driving the cost up. Of course the mere fact that it's a medical device means that the manufacturers jack the price up to make a gigantic profit off it, because doctors don't have much choice of where to buy their equipment, too.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
I'm not sure how you address famine by increasing the rates of overpopulation.
The same way you eliminate bugs by not writing software in the first place.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
Instead of facilitating the addition of millions of babies into poverty, perhaps a much greater emphasis should be placed on preventing their conception.
One of the best ways to encourage women to have fewer babies is to make them feel more confident that those fewer babies are going to be healthy.
What? Your rant makes little sense. We've had small, portable ultrasounds for years. Looking at TFA I'm not seeing much of a breakthrough - they're perhaps a bit cheaper, a bit better but I don't see the breakthrough. You can buy second hand portables for a couple of grand.... No, you don't need a really expensive or sophisticated machine to do routine obstetrics work and there are thousands of cheap, used and entirely functional ultrasounds running around. It's not the lack of technology that causes much of the 'third world' medical problems. It is the social, political and economic structures that limit creation of any sort of useful infrastructure to use the technology.
You can go buy one off the Internet without a medical degree - you just need a valid credit card. You can't charge people to have their gall bladders looked into. At that point you are 'practicing medicine'. But you can run around and impress your friends should you be so inclined. You can be as innovative as you like. That's not the problem at all.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
And that's the "buy now" price for the "Interson SeeMore USB Portable Ultrasound Abdominal Probe".
On the other hand...
As someone who had 3 different ultrasound diagnoses, to the same heart condition, by 2 specialists - which in the end turned out to be of viral origin (they were literally chasing shadows); and who later had a dubious privilege of fixing and editing hundreds of ultrasound photos for an ultrasound textbook, with each step done according to the instructions of an instructor/teacher with some 40 years in the ultrasound diagnostic - price of the equipment is not the biggest obstacle in getting the ultrasound "to the masses".
It's training and experience.
And you need literally years of both to start making your ultrasound guesses educated.
Cause without both extensive training with an experienced ultrasound technician AND years of experience in doing ultrasounds of that particular section of human body - that whole "subjective interpretation of an objective method" thing amounts to just guessing.
There's an episode of House where this is nicely demonstrated by House and Wilson trying to figure out if Cuddy's daughter has swallowed a coin.
On ultrasound it might be a dime, or it may just be an air bubble.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
In third world countries, where they need the boys to work the fields, they would abort a girl at the first chance. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9103831/In-the-third-world-unwanted-baby-girls-disappear.-Its-called-gendercide.-And-its-happening-in-this-country-too.html
I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey
Even with degraded accuracy, having _some_ imaging capability is almost certainly better than having none.
Having "some" ultrasound diagnostic capability of questionably quality is WORSE than having none.
First, you have to realize that the problem with ultrasound diagnostic is not in the lack of equipment.
Its in the lack of experts. And you really need EXPERTS, not technicians. Why?
Well, its the second thing - without years of expertise it is just a guessing game.
And experts become experts after years of training and experience of ultrasound imaging and diagnostic - on a very specific part of the body.
It's one of those "more art than science" things.
They are looking at shadows and reflections from inside of a living, moving 3D object - trying to make out a detail which would indicate some possible medical condition for that particular region of the human body.
Give a low capability device to someone with an "ultrasound course" and all you'll get is more faulty diagnoses, more "inconclusive" results and more work for the ultrasound specialists due to such ultrasounds.
You might as well equip each doctor with a portable machine that goes "PING!".
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I have worked in this exact field for 12+ years (see www.ultrasonix.com) - started as a software developer, and now involved with internal/external research and product development for the past 5 years. What the article fails to mention is that, sure there are a lot of low cost options in the market, there always have been and always will be - but their diagnostic capabilities are so inferior, that to try and address problems like pregnancy complications may be pointless. Obstetrical ultrasound is one of the most in-depth examinations that sonography can provide, and I doubt that with current technology the article is referencing (@ $100) that anything diagnostic can be achieved to help save the lives. I.e. why waste money and training time on an inferior technology, when perfectly capable ones already exist for a relatively low price already when pegged against other imaging modalities such as CT/MR/PET, etc. To give an idea, a $10,000 system is a low-cost ultrasound device these days (article references GE's V-Scan and Siemens P10 that fall under this category). These devices can definitely help see the fetus and help with very specific diagnoses, but if I knew my wife was at risk of complications, I would be appalled if she were scanned with a device like this when getting screened, so I just can't imagine that $100 technology will provide anything useful, even in 3rd world. I do believe that we'll have a ~$1000 scanner on the market, that's smart-phone sized and will provide wonderful diagnostic images, but probably not for another 10 years or so. And even in this case, it would be limited to specific exams. It would be interesting if the Newcastle group disclosed more information on their proposed technology in any case - always looking forward to the future of looking inside our bodies!
I think the population explosion in poorer countries over the last 50 years pretty conclusively shows that to be false.
There is a very strong correlation between child mortality and birthrate. When war or famine kills children, women tend to have even more children to compensate. The country with the highest birthrate in the world is Niger, which is currently experiencing both a famine and a civil war.
When UNICEF installed wells to provide clean water in many African villages, rates of childhood diarrhea fell, and the birthrate fell right along with it, and fell by more than the mortality decreased. The birthrate in neighboring villages did not fall. There is plenty more evidence showing similar results for vaccinations, anti-malaria bed nets, nutritional programs, literacy programs, and even electrification (kids are much healthier when they don't inhale soot from candles and cooking fires). All of these things reduce population growth.
I work an emergency department with an emergency physician who uses a "large, clunky US machine" to evaluate for countless disease processes quickly in pt's rooms. He and many other progressively minded physicians would jump at advances in this technology that would make it easier to use them to use.
"With patience a ruler may be persuaded, and a soft tongue will break a bone."