Wednesday 5 March 2014

What to say at Sheffield University's Industry Day?

On 6th March, I will have* the privilege of welcoming over 300 business delegates from across the whole medical devices and health technologies supply chain to the University of Sheffield.  Specifically, I have 15 minutes to introduce the day and explain why every year we set aside one day for this key sector.  This is of course not a difficult task in the sense that the drivers for innovation are well known, and they connect all of us whether we work at the laboratory bench, in a law firm specialising in patents, in a manufacturing industry in production or marketing, or indeed in a hospital.  These drivers include the ageing population, increased patient expectation, new scientific discoveries, regulatory pressure, free market competition, clinical advances, and wider government policies.  It is relatively easy for a professor in the field to construct a stimulating welcome speech based on this sort of material, coupled to examples of academic-industrial collaboration benefiting both parties, and ending with an enthusiastic invitation to delegates to talk to the University about their company's research needs to discover what we can do to help.  It might be that this is exactly the talk I will give, hopefully offering insights that will be new to at least some of the audience, but nevertheless a relatively safe presentation.

I have, however, just opened a picture taken last year of my elderly grandmother sitting next to my eight year old daughter, and I feel that this image is challenging me to raise some deeper challenges as a part of my welcome speech.  The image of my daughter reminds me that our generation have a special responsibility to create prosperity and jobs in the future, and high value manufacturing as found in the medical devices and health technology sector is exactly the kind of industry that can perform this service for the UK and Europe.  I have come to believe that responsible job creation is one of the most important things people in senior positions do - or should seek to do - whether in industry, or in universities, or within other parts of the supply chain.  Younger people have suffered disproportionally in this recession, and as we emerge it is important we create opportunities for them to flourish. I was fortunate to open a small meeting where a number of new health technology companies that had been started by young graduates presented on their work and business growth.  They were still small companies, but in only a few years had grown from one or two people to half a dozen.  What really struck me though was the energy, optimism and determination of these young entrepreneurs, and I was left with a reminder of what young people can achieve if they are given opportunities.  The task for those with power and influence is to provide those opportunities.

My gran is of course at the other end of the age spectrum, and she is now suffering from several of the problems that we associate with old age including dementia and failed hip replacements.  These past few months have seen her moved from care home to city hospital and then on to a small hospital, she is almost certainly at a point in life where she is unlikely to "get better" and the best she can hope for is to be made as safe and comfortable as possible.  Many people have experienced, or will inevitably experience, parents and grandparents ageing to the point where they are robbed of good life quality.  Seeing my gran, I feel strongly that she was previously denied interventions that could have prolonged the life of her infected hip replacement.  She was not denied these on account of her age or NICE guidelines or clinical incompetence, she was actually denied a potentially efficacious intervention by the regulatory environment.  As a result of my research I know that there are very many technologies that could be employed to eliminate or reduce the severity of a device associated infection, but the regulatory burden associated with drug-device combinations or silver-containing products is so high that it is simply not economic for companies to invest in taking these products to market.  I have though formed the view that the elderly need access to more potent health technologies than other patient groups, and even if the associated risks are greater I think this is a risk worth taking.  My gran's life expectancy is shorter than mine, she is not going to have children, her risk of cancer is low, and her innate capacity for self-repair is non-existent - by definition the types of medical device and health technology she needs are different to a younger patient, and the risks are different too.  Yet the current regulatory environment does not even try to discriminate between the needs of different patient groups, or indeed the different risks they face.  I think these are the types of questions that academic groups should have the courage to ask, and the whole health technology community should invest resources in making a more detailed argument to government and regulators.  I feel that my gran and thousands of elderly patients deserve interventions that will give them not only a long life but a good life.  More selfishly, when I am old I want the clinicians treating me to have access to products that meet my specific needs, ideally products born from UK intellectual property and made by our manufacturing industry.

I do not know yet though if I will tackle this more complex and controversial subject in my opening, ask me in the comments section below.





*Or by the time most of you read this, "will have had".