Open Innovation Challenge Offers $1 Million for Ebola Protection

October 13, 2014 By IdeaConnection

ppeThe Ebola outbreak that has now spread outside of Africa, could become “the next AIDS” unless there is a fast global response. That’s according to Thomas Frieden, Director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In Africa alone, the rate of spread is faster than the efforts to care for those infected.

The fight against the deadly hemorrhagic fever is happening on several fronts, and to boost protection for health workers, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has turned to the crowd for help.

A few days ago, USAID broadcast a request for ideas on how to overcome tropical heat stress and contagion risks when taking off protective suits. It has now offered more detail about what it wants, and that is an anti-contamination suit designed to stop health workers and airport screening personnel suffering from heat stress.

“Personal protective equipment (PPE) offers critical protection, but also is the greatest source of discomfort and stress for the workers,” said USAID on its website. “While PPEs protect health care workers, they cannot be worn for more than 40 minutes in hot climates, severely limiting the time health care workers can care for their patients.”

A Global Open Innovation Challenge

USAID has partnered with the White House Office of Science and Technology, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, other U.S. agencies and the Government of Sweden to create Fighting Ebola: A Grand Challenge for Development. A sum of $1 million is on offer for each successful design accepted by the agency.

USAID is looking for many more ideas in addition to new hazmat suits. It has launched an open innovation platform for breakthrough concepts to improve delivery of care and stem the spread of the disease. USAID is also open to partnerships for rapid testing and deploying the best solutions.

The agency wants innovators to come up with lifesaving solutions sooner rather than later. The first round of submissions to the challenge must be in by November 7. Submissions received by December 1 will be part of the second review round.


Share on      
Next Post »

Reader Comments


It seems that the suits are overheating because our body can not do what it needs to do to cool down.. If we found a way to remove the humidity of the suit could the body evaporate the moisture and stay cool on its own. Could a big (not to big) bag of desiccant in a small back pack (that would be replaceable during a shift) possibly allow the body to stay cooler? Then the problem of hydration comes up.
Posted by Nate Wightman on November 24, 2014

There are centrifugal coolers that work on compressed air. The high energy air molecules are separated from the lower energy ones. They produce a flow of cold air for the person in the suite. This can also maintain a positive flow of air out of the suit.
Posted by Bennett Willis on October 15, 2014

Consider using pulsed intense ultraviolet light as a suit decontamination step prior to removal. It could be the third step of a process which employs a liquid wash down to remove sites of clumped contaminant. Then a heated air dry step to eliminate liquid droplets remaining on the surface of the suit. next, completely irradiate the surfaces of the suit with pulsed intense ultraviolet light such as that produced by a high energy xenon flash lamp. For example, a xenon lamp system could produce ultraviolet (UV) light in the range of approximately 230 to 400 nanometers along with longer wavelengths. Surface energy density in the spectrum needed to kill microbes as well as viruses can be easily achieved. The pulses can be repetitive which lowers individual pulse energy thus avoiding the need for large energy single pulses of light. There is a significant body of work which represents investigations into the germicidal action of continuous ultraviolet light sources and also pulsed UV light sources. A continuous UV light source may require too much application time to be of practical use, but by pulsing the UV light source higher peak UV energy is made available and is far more effective as a germicidal agent. The light source could be hand-held or incorporated into a chamber into which the suited person is placed. The suit will protect the person inside from damaging effects of the UV light.
Posted by Richard Hamm on October 15, 2014

You have identified at least two problems in containing the Ebola virus. One has to do with the heat stress paced upon the workers while they are wearing the PPE. The second problem identified is the contagion risk when removing the PPE.

A clear understanding of how the Ebola virus is transmitted needs to be published and subsequent concepts of solution may then be identified and explored. I am not sure that all of the facts have been revealed or understood at this time. Is it transmitted by air (sneezing or coughing)? Do you need to touch the contaminated person, skin to skin? How long does the virus survive outside of the host? What chemicals and radiation can kill the virus? What temperature range does it survive in?
Does the CDC have this knowledge? Before we can develop solid solution concepts, we need facts that are not readily available.

After reading the WHO report on Ebola, updated on September 2014. It seems that even in countries with modest medical expertise and training infection rates are nominal and death is around 50%. In the USA, humans do not come in contact with infected animals as they might in Africa. We need to take all reasonable precautions when dealing with infected people and have to assume that all people close to the situation are infected and should be under quarantine for the 21 day incubation period.

Prevention and Control -- The WHO recommends:
"Reducing the risk of human-to-human transmission from direct or close contact with people with Ebola symptoms, particularly with their bodily fluids. Gloves and appropriate personal protective equipment should be worn when taking care of ill patients at home. Regular hand washing is required after visiting patients in hospital, as well as after taking care of patients at home."
This recommendation seems a little soft. Precautions should be ramped up and all health workers should be examined on a continuous basis.
The detection of the Ebola virus is paramount, waiting 21 days for symptoms only opens the the window to greater public exposure. Faster detection before symptoms appear would greatly limit transmission to the public.
Posted by Richard Langevin on October 15, 2014

My experience with negative-strand RNA viruses and HIV-1 leads me to recommend an IV drip of Caesium salts to treat individuals infected with Ebola virus. Ebola is a haemorrhagic fever virus, cachexia is a slow form of haemorrhagic fever, and Caesium salts have been used in the past to combat cachexia in cancer patients. Caesium salts used as an IV drip are stable, cheap, and can be used independently or in conjunction with other antiviral drugs, vaccines or plasma. IV Caesium would slow down Ebola virus replication enough to allow the patient's own immune system to catch up and clear the infection.
Posted by Benjamin M Blumberg, PhD on October 15, 2014

What I think could be done may have been done. But I write down here anyway in case it's not yet. We can collect those animals we think is the source of the Elola virus and get their blood samples to test and research how virus is killed in their blood. Please treat these animals well. Perhaps Ebola would not jump out from jungle if people have more respect to nature and environment. But this is more from philosophic aspect, will not be much helpful now. Thanks.
Posted by Yuehui Zhou on October 15, 2014

just a note. if the contamination is occurring during removal of contaminated gear, consider misting the suited health care worker with a phosphorescent application immediately prior to disrobing so that after removal of the gear the health care worker can be examined for transfer of the phosphorescent material to the worker. in radiation contaminated environments the workers are scanned for contamination after removal of protective gear. the same might help with these deadly but hard to detect biological agents.
Posted by Bob Brackett on October 15, 2014

Add your Comment

[LOGIN FIRST] if you're already a member.

fields are required.




Note: Your name will appear at the bottom of your comment.