Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T10:17:02.493Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Decision Support for Re-Designed Medicinal Products - Assessing Consequences of a Customizable Product Design on the Value Chain from a Sustainability Perspective

Part of: Design for Healthcare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Maria Siiskonen ,
Matilda Watz ,
Johan Malmqvist  and
Staffan Folestad
Maria Siiskonen*
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology;
Matilda Watz
Affiliation:
Blekinge Institute of Technology;
Johan Malmqvist
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology;
Staffan Folestad
Affiliation:
AstraZeneca Gothenburg
*
Contact: Siiskonen, Maria Daniela Irene, Chalmers University of Technology, Industrial and materials science, Sweden, maria.siiskonen@chalmers.se

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Despite advances in pharmacological research providing means for individually customized patient attribute treatments, the 'one-size-fits-all' paradigm remains. Customization is associated with cost increases and the value assessment of customized medicinal products shows upon a narrow economic focus. Inspired by value models, emerging in manufacturing industry research, this study suggests a novel methodology encompassing a full sustainability perspective, including the social, economic and ecological dimension, for design decision support for medicinal products. A concept screening matrix is adapted, using sustainability criteria as value indicators. The focus is to create value for the whole pharmaceutical value chain whilst keeping the core purpose of medicinal products, i.e. to bring societal benefits. An illustrative case study presents an application of the methodology on a commercial product for curing hypertension. The traditional product design for hypertension treatment is compared to a customized product design. Results indicate that a customized product design is preferable if value is to be created from a social or/and an ecological sustainability perspective.

Keywords

Personalized medicinesProduct architectureSustainabilitySustainable product designDecision making
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 867 - 876
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Aitken, M. (2016), “Understanding the pharmaceutical value chain”, Pharm Policy and Law, Vol. 18 No. 1–4, pp. 55–66. http://doi.org/cxzcGoogle Scholar
Bertoni, M., Hallstedt, S. and Isaksson, O. (2015), “A model-based approach for sustainability and value assessment in the aerospace value chain”, Adv Mech Eng, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp. 1–19. http://doi.org/f3pnrf.Google Scholar
Broman, G.I. and Robért, K-H. (2017), “A framework for strategic sustainable development”, J Cleaner Prod, Vol. 140 No. 1, pp. 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.121.Google Scholar
Claesson, A. (2006), “A Configurable Component Framework Supporting Platform-Based Product Development”, Doctoral Thesis, Department of Product and Production Development, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.Google Scholar
Crommelin, D.J.A., Storm, G. and Luijten, P. (2011), “‘Personalised medicine’ through ‘personalised medicines’: Time to integrate advanced, non-invasive imaging approaches and smart drug delivery systems”, Int J Pharm, Vol. 415 No. 1–2, pp. 5–8. http://doi.org/fr4thx.Google Scholar
Food and Drug Administration. (2015), Size, Shape, and Other Physical Attributes of Generic Tablets and Capsules Guidance for Industry.Google Scholar
Food and Drug Administration. (2018), Step 3: Clinical Research.Google Scholar
Goyanes, A., Martinez, P.R., Buanz, A., Basit, A.W. and Gaisford, S. (2015), “Effect of geometry on drug release from 3D printed tablets”, Int J Pharm, Vol. 494 No. 2, pp. 657–663. http://doi.org/f7vm6f.Google Scholar
Hallstedt, S.I., Bertoni, M. and Isaksson, O. (2015), “Assessing sustainability and value of manufacturing processes: a case in the aerospace industry”, J Cleaner Prod, Vol. 108, pp. 169–182. http://doi.org/f3pz7z.Google Scholar
Harrington, T.S., Phillips, M.A. and Srai, J.S. (2017), “Reconfiguring global pharmaceutical value networks through targeted technology interventions”, Int J Prod Res, Vol. 55 No. 5, pp. 1471–1487. http://doi.org/cxr7.Google Scholar
Hatz, M.H.M., Schremser, K. and Rogowski, W.H. (2014), “Is individualized medicine more cost-effective? a systematic review”, PharmacoEconomics, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 443–455. http://doi.org/f53wq6.Google Scholar
Ho, P.M., Rumsfeld, J.S., Masoudi, F.A., McClure, D.L., Plomondon, M.E., Steiner, J.F. and Magid, D.J. (2006), “Effect of medication nonadherence on hospitalization and mortality among patients with diabetes mellitus”, Arch Intern Med, Vol. 166, pp. 1836–1841. http://doi.org/dwhzz4Google Scholar
Klingmann, V., Spomer, N., Lerch, C., Stoltenberg, I., Frömke, C., Bosse, H.M., Breitkreutz, J. and Meissner, T. (2013), “Favorable acceptance of mini-tablets compared with syrup: a randomized controlled trial in infants and preschool children”, J Pediatrics, Vol. 163, pp. 1728–1733. http://doi.org/f2nzbt.Google Scholar
Lee, S.L., O'Connor, T.F., Yang, X., Cruz, C.N., Chatterjee, S., Madurawe, R.D., Moore, C.M.V., Yu, L.X. and Woodcock, J. (2015), “Modernizing pharmaceutical manufacturing: from batch to continuous production”, J Pharm Innov, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 191–199. http://doi.org/cxr8.Google Scholar
MacGill, M. (2018), Everything You Need to Know about Hypertension. Available at: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/150109.php (Accessed: 4 December 2018).Google Scholar
Nagashree, K. (2015), “Solid dosage forms: Tablets”, J Pharm Analysis, Vol. 4. No. 2Google Scholar
Nicholson Price, W. and Rai, A.K. (2015), “Manufacturing barriers to biologics competition and innovation”, Iowa Law Review.Google Scholar
Pugh, S. (1990), Total Design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering, Addison-Wesley, Wokingham.Google Scholar
Savoia, C., Volpe, M., Grassi, G., Borghi, C., Agabiti Rosei, E. and Touyz, R.M. (2017), “Personalized medicine — a modern approach for the diagnosis and management of hypertension”, Clinical Science, Vol. 131 No. 22, pp. 2671–2685. http://doi.org/cxr9.Google Scholar
Segawa, A., Yoshikawa, S., Toyama, T., Nakanishi, H., Kikuchi-Uehara, E., Hirao, M. and Sugiyama, H. (2016), “Method for reducing environmental, health, and safety risks in active pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturing based on multiobjective evaluation”, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, Vol. 104, pp. 304–313. http://doi.org/cxsb.Google Scholar
Sheldon, R.A. (2016), “Green chemistry and resource efficiency: towards a green economy”, Green Chem, Vol. 18 pp. 3180–3183. http://doi.org/cxsc.Google Scholar
Siiskonen, M., Folestad, S. and Malmqvist, J. (2018), “Applying function-means tree modelling to personalized medicines”, In Proceedings of NordDesign 2018, Linköping, 14th–17th August 2018Google Scholar
Slater, C.S., Savelski, M.J. and Ruiz-Felix, M.N. (2013), “Life cycle analysis of solvent reduction in pharmaceutical synthesis using continuous adsorption for palladium removal”, J Env Sci Health, Part A, Vol. 48 No. 13, pp. 1602–1608. http://doi.org/cxsd.Google Scholar
Slater, C.S. and Savelski, M. (2007), “A method to characterize the greenness of solvents used in pharmaceutical manufacture”, J Env Sci Health, Part A, Vol. 42 No. 11, pp. 1595–1605. http://doi.org/bg2hjh.Google Scholar
Srai, J.S., Harrington, T., Alinaghian, L. and Phillips, M. (2015), “Evaluating the potential for the continuous processing of pharmaceutical products-a supply network perspective”, Chem Eng and Proc, Vol. 97, pp. 248–258. http://doi.org/f7z2t6.Google Scholar
Ulrich, Karl T and Eppinger, S. D. (2012), Product Design and Development, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Unger, C. (2013), Yttrande över Miljömålsberedningens delbetänkande “Minska riskerna med farliga ämnen” (SOU 2012:38) samt Kemikalie-inspektionens rapporter “Bättre EU-regler för en giftfri miljö” och “Handlingsplan för en giftfri vardag – förslag till åtgärder”, (Opinion on Environmental objectives council's interim report “Reduce risks of dangerous substances” (SOU 2012:38) and Swedish Chemicals Agency's reports “Better EU-rules for a non-toxic environment” and “Action plan for a non-toxic living - suggestions for actions”), In Swedish.Google Scholar
Villamil, C., Nylander, J., Hallstedt, S.I., Schulte, J. and Watz, M. (2018), “Additive Manufacturing from a Strategic Sustainability Perspective”, In Proceedings of the DESIGN 2018 15th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, 21st–24th May 2018, pp. 1381–1392.Google Scholar