 Fa wnaeth beth amlawni eich cyfnodd y byddwch yng Nghymru o ddaeth cyfnodd, a'u cyfrifio ar gyfer y cyfnodd ymddangosiaeth a'r cyfrifio ar gyfer y prosiectau. Mae yna'r pryddysig o'r prosiectau oherwydd â'r archedau a'r fforddau sydd ychydig yn ei ddweud ychydig. Yn ymgyrch ymddangosiaeth, yma'n gyfnodd yng nghyrch o'r ddweud ychydig y bwysig, gwahau cymryd cyfrif ждawol iawn. Mae'n rhan i, ymlaen i'n rhan o'r cyfrif iawn o bobl cyflwr i'r cyfrif iawn. Mae'n ymweld y cyfrif iawn o'r cyfrif iawn. Mae hynny'n gwybod o'r awrch i ddegyfu. Rydyn ni'n gofynu'n gwybod a'u gwybod. Ond rydyn ni'n gofynu'n gwybod a'u gwybod o'r cyfrif iawn o'r cyfrif iawn o'r cyfrif iawn o'r cyfrif iawn o'r cyfrif iawn. iawn. Felly'r ffordd, o ffordd a'r ffordd arall yn oed bryd. Mae'n newyddau o'u gwreithio, bod yw'r phryd yr efficfans a bryd o feithio arall yn ei wfodol. Ond yma'r dweud yn fferyd desud, mae'r diwrnod dweud ofu'i cyfnodol, ac yn afganistad, mae'n defnyddio'r sgwr cwmplecol. cyfnodd wedi gwneud ei fodr, ac mae'r bobl equity-igol yn fau'r cyfnodd yn ei ddweud y brailiadyn yn aelodd chi'n wneud. Felly, mae'r byw'r cynhyrchu gyda'r blaenau, mae'r byw'r basiol wedi gynnwys ei ffordd i amser ei gyfnodd i'r cyfnodd ei gydagion i gydagion i'r cynhyrchu cyffredin iawn. A wnaeth guideddiad arswt a'r cyfnodd ymgredig o'i gwbl yma yng nghylch i'r teimlo'i ddiogelol Ogreithreit a'r gyrnawi ddaroach. Mae'n Mynd i fod wedi cael ei 관frwysau y gallwn y cyfarwyddol gyda'i fwrdd y gallu doorsglydd ymynd gweithio, os petwch oedd hynny, aethau'r cyfrwynghwyl yn oed yn gallu bywyd o'r rhan fyddwysau, a bei'r cyfrwynghwyl yn ymweld yn teimlo, ac yn ceisio pan oedd yma o ydym eich phoenixio a'u dynnu. Yma'r wirth frysgwydau, dod ydym fawr cyfrwyngwyl cyflwyngwyr, gan cyfrwyngwyr cyfrwyngwyr, side theory system for why buy a man, the effection of prevention control, and then we moved on to looking at a quantitative studies with academic institutions looking at the existing systems we had and the reasons why they maybe don't fulfill our needs perfectly or the reasons why they're breaking down regularly. We then engaged with a manufacturer喜енер in bed who've now become ond rhai sydd wedi fyndeithio bod o'r cyfrif rhwol i ni gan yna'r meddwl yw. Dw i fod yn ffantyd ar y tîm MC Cymru i'w ddiddir sydd eisiau amliadr arna. Mae cyfrif rhwng wahanol yn cyfrif rhwng dweud. Felly gennych yn gael y cyfrif rhwng a ffamil. Dyna'r ddych chi'n gweithio ychydig. dyma, ac mae'n amlwg i'n bwysig o'r taisiau. Ond yma er mwyn ar y brusils ar mlwysig ar hyn, ac nid o'r unrhyw o'r ymddorol, Willie mae chyfoddaeth i amlwg ymddorol sy'n bod ymddorol gyda'r ysgNOd i ddiwedd y sgold bob oes wirfodol o'r ond. One of the things we noticed during this was that the existing tests that we would normally use to test a sterilisation device basically just weren't sufficient, so we would normally use the Bowie Dick test which is looking at a steam penetration of effectively like a block of paper, and that's fine for our more basic projects, but when it comes to dealing with more complex hollow instruments, the external experts told us that just wasn't going to do it, so what we needed was actually this electronic testing system which was lent to us by 3M, and this allows for a full test to include whether it's going to sterilise complex instruments as well. From the test in Brussels, initially both the existing systems we used plus the new prototype failed this test, but the good thing was by having the external experts there, they were fairly confident, they said okay this isn't a big issue, you just need to change the algorithm of the steriliser, the prototype, and then they were confident that it would pass later, and sure enough it did, about two months later after some adjustments with the company we tested it with the ETS and it passed, the old system didn't. The next phase was to test this in the field, so in September the prototype was sent to Haiti and it was installed I think over the course of about half a day, it went very smoothly and then we had a week of training. Everything was going great, the manufacturer and the people in the store near left and then a day later it broke. Fortunately having a good relationship with the manufacturer, they sent someone out a few weeks later and fixed it, it was a small issue with an electro valve, really not a big deal but that was something that we realised we hadn't really planned for maintenance so early on which we should have done. In terms of results we can say that this prototype autoclave is 75% more efficient in terms of water, it's a 30% average time reduction in terms of the cycle time and it's also verified for the tubular instruments which was in the original brief. As a kind of unexpected, well maybe not unexpected but an advantageous side note for staff, for the national staff working in the sterilisation room, the autoclave which is basically fully automated you just press a button and it starts. It has a reduced heat output which means it's a more pleasant working environment for the staff because in the sterilisation room it can get really hot because you've got these gas burners with the old systems. Simplified and standardised which means less error and less possibility of potentially damaging instruments and also more time for staff to basically go and do other things during it instead of having to monitor all the systems. Also we felt that the maintenance requirements were quite reasonable compared to maybe European systems. In terms of next steps we're definitely looking at improving the prototype and we're also thinking about where else this can be used if other organisations are interested in taking it on. Maybe MOH hospitals will be because it fits quite nicely into that sort of category. It's also for us we accept that if this prototype becomes a lot of units are bought and it has continuity on the market that's going to be better for us because it means that units potentially will get cheaper and also the maintenance and spare parts will be easier to find. So the Swedish Innovation Unit we use a three phase innovation process which follows the initiation, development and implementation stages. We use this for the project. I'd say to date on this project we've got to the seventh step on here so the piloting and now it's kind of a question of diffusing and hopefully buying more units to see how it goes. For us the advantages of this process it's a reflective process. It really allows us internally as MSF to re-evaluate the pros and the cons of our current systems. It also gives us a chance to gain new insights into the way that people are doing things. It's something for example that often protocols will just go on for a very long time and then only be reviewed maybe after like five or 10 years. Whereas here just doing this process in itself is kind of a review as well as working towards a new prototype. It's much cheaper than producing an industry and this is something that some of the counter arguments for using innovation in MSF are that the market will just produce something eventually. But what you could say is that through the pro bono work that universities have given us through the relatively low rates that we work at in the innovation unit plus like the investment from external partners and in this case the manufacturer. The overall cost of producing this working prototype which has worked very well has been much lower than it would be if an industry company or actor basically said okay we want to produce this and they say okay well it's going to cost us 100,000 instead of 40,000. And then an advantage of the innovation unit is that we really like facilitating between internal and external partners and we really feel like that's the best way to get a product which kind of fits all the needs and really bring in expertise. In terms of lessons learned, the timeline we had was potentially a little bit over optimistic. That said if you look at from I mean I think from the point that the company was involved that was about two years ago and having a prototype which is so successful at this point. I think it was a very fast process but as always with MSF we like to say okay let's have it tomorrow and that's maybe not possible but bearing in mind a realistic timeline is definitely something we need to need to work with. We also saw that expertise is really valuable and it goes both ways and I think this is something which we also sometimes don't appreciate when we're dealing with external partners is the idea that from a commercial point of view if a company wants to get into a developing country or industry or work with other humanitarian organisations the input that we put in as MSF is extremely valuable to them. So actually bearing that in mind and not just seeing it as a sort of one way I'll thank you you're helping us and saying okay actually you're getting some out of this as well and sort of dealing on a level like balance playing field is definitely a good thing. Finally I mean the it was very clear from from this project that we don't have that much expertise when it comes to the IP and licensing agreements and when it comes to commercial partnerships as well. We definitely have room for improvement to understanding exactly what agreements should look like and I mean in this case it was a very positive partnership but it you know making sure that we're prepared for for how these partnerships could go in in the sense of licensing or IP down the line is an important thing that we need to we need to consider. To conclude then I think the smiling faces there except for that guy out there are like to speak for itself it was a very successful project basically all the all the needs in the brief are met. I think you say the company were pleased with the product they produced as well they're looking to to expand the market for this and sell more units obviously and I think overall that was a very positive experience. Finally we got some acknowledgments these are some partners we worked with and that's it. Thank you. So any questions of clarity one here and one here do you want to go here first it's nearer to you. Can you hear me no yes sorry how much did it cost. In terms of development the company put in around 40,000 euros of their own money towards the development. I think obviously the time costs of the innovation units I think were maybe equivalent so it's a tricky one but I say under 100,000 and then the units themselves are aiming to be sold around the 25,000 euro price point. If you could say your name and where you're from. Hello hello that was just a question of speaking into it. Okay I'm Connor from MSF and I had a question about the commercial partnership you had a successful commercial partnership and I wanted to know if like did you did you did you frame that at the beginning with like written MOUs or contracts was that very well framed or was that more ad hoc. I'd say in this case it was quite ad hoc. I think we were approaching it from the view of okay well they're not promising anything and we're not expecting anything so let's see how it goes. I think in the future considering how successful it is it would be better to frame it more formally potentially. Okay do you have it here. Yeah I just actually want to follow on question that price point how does that compare to developing something in industry. Yes it's a good question I'm not I can't say definitively but the definitely speaking to people about it is the impression is that if you were to develop an industry it would be significantly maybe four or five times higher. Right okay and secondly is that is it now still in place in Tabar in Haiti? Yeah it's still working it's still working and hasn't had any problems since. And lastly actually is about really back to that partnership was how did you select that company and why? It was a bit of serendipity really. They actually had come I think they'd approached OCA basically saying we want to get involved with some of your autoclave products and the contact got passed on so it was just coincidence. Lovely we have a couple of questions on this side. Catini from MSF also. How did the cost of licensing relate to the cost of development? Is the microphone working sorry if we can hear you just for our online audience as well. Oh sorry the cost of licensing how did they compare to the cost of developing could you maybe. In what sense? Well I can imagine you have the cost of developing that's one expenditure but then the cost of the licensing procedure that would also entail cost and to maintain the license etc etc that would also involve costs. I can imagine that at some point the producer would take over those costs but this is always an issue if you develop a new product. At some point there is insufficient market or demand and then there is no interest to continue spending on the maintaining the licensing and that causes the problems. So actually at the moment there is no formalized licensing agreement effectively the manufacturer has taken on all that cost and it's their product so that could be seen as something we need to work on but also from our perspective it's like well we have the product that we wanted. Question here a couple of words behind. Okay I did not understand if the device for testing the sterilization process was part of the innovation process or I mean your invent the device. The 3M yes so that is an existing device from 3M. The fact was that as well the internal experts we were using and external it was just through the conversation with the external experts that it became apparent that our existing testing system was not up to standard when it came to the complex instruments. So it already existed and 3M actually loaned it through us through a contact. Hi I'm Joanna Keenan from MSFs in international office just on the licensing and IP. So is it the company that holds particularly the IP side of things and kind of how does the innovation unit share some of the IP and how do you kind of envisage the intellectual property on this in the future. Is it something you kind of hope to you know kind of like what Terry was saying in the beginning to kind of make it a bit more of a multiplex kind of platform open source kind of thing to kind of share it maybe a little bit more affordable in the future. That's a good question so for this project basically there is very little agreement it's very kind of based on a good relationship that we have with the manufacturer. I think for we've seen this in some of the other projects we're running that to get a more formalised IP agreement early on is key. Again I think for this project just that this device is now kind of on the market and available to us we've kind of seen as an advantage in itself though there would be room to potentially for future projects go into that.