This invention covers the field of application where users are needing protection from accidental punctures from scalpel blades during the use and storage of surgical scalpels. More importantly, this invention allows the user of the device to be either left or right handed while still being able to use the device with the controlling mechanism located next to the user's thumb. The user of this invention also is able to ascertain the position of the shield through tactile sensory perception as well as having the safety of knowing that removal of the blade is only accomplished by a secondary ejectment location of the shield which is not part of the normal operation of the shield.
Each year many users accidentally slice or puncture themselves with sharp instruments either during use, during transfer from one person to another or from inadvertent misplacement of sharps in potentially dangerous locations. This is especially dangerous in the medical arena, as potentially fatal diseases can be spread through accidental contact with sharps. Emergency Rooms are battlegrounds compared to the operating rooms where quick action amongst many people is required to save lives. Sharp protection is a must and must be easy to operate. Prior art is replete with many different styles of devices that act to cover sharp blades.
There are 4 main types of prior art that exist to prevent users from accidental contact with sharp blades. The 4 areas involve devices where 1) the sharp is retracted into the body of the device; 2) where the device is a disposable or single use application, where the entire sharp with the handle is not reused; 3) a device that moves in a non-linear fashion to cover the blade while it is not in use; and 4) those devices which remove a detachable blade from the handle of the device. Only the fourth type of devices is applicable to this invention as the shield slides in a linear path along the handle.
The fourth arena of the prior art involves the use of devices whereby the sharp is attached to and then removed from the handle. In one group, there are those devices where the sharp is directly attached to the handle and another group contains devices where the sharp is placed into a cartridge which is then placed upon the handle. Both groups involve handling of the sharp prior to its inclusion into some protective cover, increasing the chance of accidental puncture. In the first group, Herbert et al in U.S. Pat. No. 5,868,771 issued on Feb. 9, 1999, Newman et al in U.S. Pat. No. 6,626,925 issued on Sep. 30, 2003 and van der Westhuizen et al in U.S. Pat. No. 5,330,494 disclose the procedure of attaching the sharp to the handle and then attaching a sliding blade guard. Once the sharp is used, the blade can be removed along with the guard. Herbert uses existing style surgical handles, while van der Westhuizen and Newman use a unique handle that is modified at the distal end of the handle nearest the sharp, to receive the guard. Both devices require the user to load the sharps device onto the handle, requiring the unguarded sharp to be handled by those that the device is designed to protect, and often those people are wearing gloves which will reduce tactile feel. In a different approach disclosed by Noack in U.S. Pat. No. 5,312,429 issued on May 17, 1994, a unique blade with an opposed tang is removed by sliding the blade release element when the element is slid down the handle toward the sharp. This is a two handed operation involving two separate pieces. In the sliding of the element, if one's hand slips from the element it would be certainly cut by the exposed blade. Also the blade is without direction or restraint when released from its location on the handle. It could fly anywhere in the operating room as there is tension built up between the tang of the blade and the rest of the blade that was forced over the post on the handle.
Cartridge types highlighted by U.S. Pat. No. 7,207,999 to Griffin et al issued on Apr. 24, 2007, show the use of a cartridge that contains the blade for the scalpel. The cartridge doubles as a shield when it is retracted over the handle after the attachment of the blade to the tang of the handle. Each cartridge is unique to a particular style of blade and requires a two handed operation to remove and attach the blade. This extra cartridge material creates costly waste. It is also against current disposal regulations to mix plastics with metal sharps containers as they require different disposal techniques. U.S. Pat. No. 7,172,611 issued to Harding et al on Feb. 6, 2007 shows another cartridge but this one is required to use a special blade with “non-arcuate” holes which increase the cost and decreases its effectiveness to be used with a broad range of access. All cartridge style scalpels use the removal of the cartridge that contains the blade as the means for blade removal. Though safe, these devices are limited by needing unique cartridges to hold the wide variety of blades available.
Another adaptation of this concept, which is closer to the current invention, is found in the series of patents from Jolly et al, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,827,309; 5,752,968 and 5,792,162 issued Oct. 27, 1998, May 19, 1998 and Aug. 11, 1998 respectively. These Jolly patents show a blade remover which first removes the tang of the blade from the post into a notch on the sliding guard. The '968 Patent discloses that “guard 30 can be advanced distally to force blade 50 from blade carrier”. The built in stresses mentioned above are now increased with a forcible removal of the blade with the sliding guard, increasing the chance for the blade to be misdirected about the operating room. In the second group, Gharibian in U.S. Pat. No. 5,527,329 issued on Jun. 18, 1996 and Cohn et al in U.S. Pat. No. 5,938,676 issued on Aug. 17, 1999 disclose the use of a cartridge system whereby the sharp is placed into a cartridge which is then encased by a guard prior to its placement onto the handle. This operation is safer as the sharp is guarded during assembly but creates a situation as each discloses a unique handle designed to receive the cartridges and shields. Cohn et al in U.S. Pat. No. 5,941,892 issued on Aug. 24, 1999 combines prior art by incorporating the cartridge concept that is “removably retained within the cavity” in the handle. This is a safe alternative but uses unique handles. All of the prior art in this section requires the use of two hands to safely operate the device which is at odds with current FDA compliance rules.
In the last arena of prior art, a guard is placed around a stationary blade. There is nothing unique about the concept, and its application can be seen from the simple to the complex. Applications of a more complex nature are found in Abidin et al in U.S. Pat. No. 5,662,669 issued on Sep. 2, 1997 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,569,281 issued on Oct. 29, 1996, Jolly et al in U.S. Pat. No. 5,741,289 issued on Apr. 21, 1998, Matwijcow in U.S. Pat. No. 5,207,696 and Dolgin et al in U.S. Pat. No. 5,071,426 issued on Dec. 10, 1991. Matwijcow discloses a rack and pinion system for movement of the guard over the blade which causes a reverse sequence of logic, as the user needs to pull back to move the guard forward. This could be confusing in the fast paced operating room where several different types of devices might be used at once. Dolgin also uses a “linkage system” to extend the blade guard “over a substantially greater distance than the distance which the surgeon's fingers move in operating the actuating mechanism”. This is an unnecessarily complex and expensive concept using unique handles which require manual loading of the blades onto the handle. Jolly provides for both linear actuation of the guard along with a rotational movement of the guard and blade away from the handle for cleaning purposes. This device is complex and expensive to manufacture and use. The Abidin '281 patent discloses a guard which “comprises an inverted U-shaped channel member telescopically mounted within the hollow handle for sliding movement therein”. It is held in position by an exposed pin which would be in the way of the surgeon's hands and could be accidentally triggered to move at the improper time. This device is also not usable with currently used scalpels and it requires a unique handle. Abidin '669 is another internally guided blade guard with a unique handle. But this patent also discloses in column 10 line 11, that it does not work with conventional scalpel blades. '669 does combine a blade guard and a blade ejector, but FIG. 36 details the need for two handed operation to remove the blade. FIG. 45 and FIG. 48 show that the blade is not restrained after it is removed from the handle, and as described above, there is a considerable amount of tension on the blade. The disclosure details the added tension as the guard actually pushes the blade off of the post upon which it is attached. There is nothing to restrain the loose blade. An unrestrained blade could fly off anywhere in the operating room and this is not a safe method of removal. '669 also discloses in FIG. 32 the complicated way of attaching the blade with two small pins, which would be very difficult with gloved hands in a hurried operating room. FIG. 130 of '669 shows the user sliding the guard forward using their forefinger, which would present an obvious problem should the guard become slippery due to bodily fluids, and the user's finger slips from the guard onto the exposed blade.
The inventor of this current invention has his own prior art in the field of scalpels that have a blade that is attached/detached from a handle, but differ substantially from the current invention. U.S. Pat. No. 8,156,653 issued on Apr. 17, 2012 to Austria, discloses a top rail mounted scalpel with three basic segments. That invention requires the use of two hands in order to eject the blade and the blade becomes trapped in the shield, requiring the use of another action by the user to get rid of the sharps blade, which is not desirable as well as having an impediment that all of the existing prior art possesses. The inability to be ambidextrous, allowing for left handed and right handed users to operate and to be trained upon one instrument in the same manner, while enjoying all of the advantages of the “right” handed version.
There is a need to preclude the problems associated with the prior art and the current state of technology in this field. It would be preferable to produce a device that would provide current users with a device that would improve upon some of the shortcomings of the prior art. Industry has set standards for their equipment and it would be desirable to have a device that fits their standard equipment, rather than adapt to new equipment. Sharps users, especially surgeons, are used to the weight, balance, fit, form and feel of their tools of the trade, and are reticent to change. It is well practiced in the medical field, that metal sharps handles are used because they possess a certain weight and balance that plastic handles have a hard time replicating. Industry needs to adapt protections to currently used sharps, as new devices are usually met with skepticism and doubt, and are thus not used. Industry does not want to carry duplicative inventories of many similar products because they do not work with one another.
It is also important to recognize that though only 7% of the population are considered left-handed, over 15% of all surgeons are left-handed according to the British Medical Journal in 2005, which found that left-handed surgeons are forced to use right handed devices causing a greater incident of accidental punctures from sharps. Left handed surgeons should be able to use devices designed for left-handed surgeons while accommodating the number of devices that a hospital must have in its inventory. A device that is capable of use by right or left handed surgeons reduces the amount of inventory that must be carried by the surgical institution.
It would be desirable to have a new device made in such a manner that it could have multiple users, and could be reusable. It would be desirable to have the device made of autoclavable plastic or metal and designed so that it will not have any hidden recesses or other cavities that would trap harmful bacteria precluding the chance that it could be autoclavable. It would be desirable and advantageous to possess a blade removing apparatus which is designed not to interfere with a user's single handed operation of the device while insuring that accidental removal of the blade is eliminated.
It would be desirable to have a scalpel to be able to easily remove and change blades during surgical procedures, whereby one handle is capable of receiving multiple sizes and shapes of blades.
These and other features, advantages, and objects of the present invention will be further understood and appreciated by those skilled in the art by reference to the following specification, claims, and appended drawings.
Accordingly, it is the goal of this invention to create a sharps protection device that has the aforementioned characteristics of simplicity, protection, adaptability to current uses and safety. It is an object of this invention to create a device that will protect both the user of the sharp as well as the person who comes in accidental contact with misplaced sharps, and for the person to whom the sharp is transferred.
It is an object of this invention to create a device that is operable with a single hand and allows for the user to be either left or right handed to operate the device. The user must be able to retract or extend the sharps guard and be able to remove the sharp from the handle if that option is available to the user with the particular sharp.
It is an object of this invention to create a device that does not interfere with the normal operation of the scalpel and that does not substantially change the feel of the scalpel. It is an object of this invention to create a device whose design allows for the modification of said design altering the weight and balance characteristics while maintaining overall design allowing for interchangeability.
It is an object of this invention to create a device that is rapidly interchangeable between a wide range of sharp's blades of varying devices from different manufacturers. The device must be simple to use and maintain. Users must be able to disassemble, clean, and reassemble in a matter of moments, while using gloved hands with reduced tactile feel. The device must have no small or intricate parts which would preclude the quick assembly of the device or that would foul or catch on the gloved hands of the surgical team.
It is an object of this invention to create a device which adapts to current state of the art devices, reducing the need for training, evaluating and maintaining multiple inventories of devices and sharps. It is an object of this invention that industry standard blades, which are accepted onto a wide range of currently existing handles, are to be used without modification to the blade or handle.
It is an object of this invention to create a device which has positive stops, including tactual and auditory signals, indicating the relative position of the guard, either in retraction or extension of the surgical safety scalpel.
It is an object of this invention to create a device that does not involve placing of the protective device over the sharp in such a manner that actually increases the likelihood of accidental contact with the sharp. The user should be able to use the device immediately “out of the box” without having to add guarding or assemble cartridges prior to safe use.
It is an object of this invention to create a device that will provide for safe removal of the sharp from the surgical safety scalpel while using only a single hand for the operation. It is a further object of this invention to have the sharp blade covered during the time the user's hands are ejecting the blade, thereby reducing the chance for accidental puncture and to restrict the possibility of having the blade ejected into the surgical arena.
It would be desirable to create a device which is autoclavable or sterilizable in any accepted means, and is cleanable without disassembly, the device being absent of internal voids, sharp corners, chambers or holes which trap unsanitary material precluding the ability to easily clean and sanitize the device through autoclaving or other means and reuse of the device. The use of autoclavable or autoclaving in this specification is not a limiting factor but rather a general statement of the process of sterilizing and/or cleaning the device, through whatever means that are currently accessible and acceptable by the industry.
This invention as disclosed in the drawings has the principal use in the surgical environment but there exists no limiting language to prevent this invention to be practiced in other fields of use. The invention consists of three main elements, a handle, that holds the sharps blade, a shield that slides upon the handle, and having the shield also capable of removing the blade from the handle. This invention is a sharps device, such as a knife, scalpel or box opener, with a detachable shielding means which is capable of removing said sharp from said device.
In
Sharp 300 having a cutting edge 303 which is opposite of the dull edge 305, sharp 300 having a vertical orientation basically parallel to the vertical faces of the handle 100. Sharp 300 has a pointed distal end 304 and a proximal end containing the tang 301 of the blade. The blade 300 is mounted to handle 100 through an integral mounting feature 302 which interfaces with the sharps mounting groove 103. This invention is designed to accept industry standard surgical blades.
Shield 200 contains a side mounted button 210 where said button is mounted on the interior side of the device whereby it is accessible to the thumb of the user. Button 210 is outwardly biased due to the bias of flange 215 which flexes through flexor 209 which is integral to shield 200. The rear portion 205 of shield 200 is located behind the button area providing stability to the rear portion of the shield. The shape of rear portion 205 is designed so as to provide a close fit between the shield and the tapered butt end 101 as reasonable engineering tolerances will allow. The channel 110 includes a rearward shield open segment 150 and a forward closed shield segment 152 separated by segment 135 and a frontal ejectment segment 154. Each segment 150, 152, and 154 is generally defined by an inclined segment guide (ramp) 112, a positive tactile feel gutter (detent) 111, and a terminating segment wall 105. Also shown in
Ejectment inclined guide (ramp) 114 is shown in
Another unique feature of this invention is the ability to insert the sharp into either a cutting edge facing upwards or downwards as is more commonly done. Due to the shape and location of the tang stops 122 and 123, a sharps can be inserted in the normal cutting side down configuration as seen in
It can be appreciated by those appropriately skilled in the art that changes, modifications or embodiments can be made to this invention without departing from the spirit, principles, theories, ideas or conceptions that have been disclosed in the foregoing. It is herein recognized that the embodiments disclosed by this description of the best mode of practicing this invention, which will be hereafter described in their full breadth in the claims and equivalents thereof.
The present application is a continuation of pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/802,522, filed Mar. 13, 2013, entitled “Side Activated Safety Scalpel for Left and Right Hand Users with Blade Removal System,” now U.S. Pat. No. 9,622,773, which claims benefit of provisional application No. 61/685,480, filed Mar. 19, 2012, entitled “Side Activated Safety Scalpel for Left and Right Hand Users with Blade Removal System,” the entire disclosures of which are hereby incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
D334981 | Rampe, Jr. | Jan 1886 | S |
1002468 | Strangman | Sep 1911 | A |
D194087 | Jenkins | Nov 1962 | S |
D194418 | Gaspar | Jan 1963 | S |
3380573 | Gulotta | Apr 1968 | A |
3442378 | Wolfe | May 1969 | A |
3696920 | Lahay | Oct 1972 | A |
3785544 | Smith | Jan 1974 | A |
D231714 | Arthur | May 1974 | S |
3916448 | Hamel | Nov 1975 | A |
3921289 | Hasegawa | Nov 1975 | A |
D248871 | Forsman et al. | Aug 1978 | S |
4106620 | Brimmer et al. | Aug 1978 | A |
D249362 | Forsman et al. | Sep 1978 | S |
4120397 | Neumann | Oct 1978 | A |
4168777 | Gaskell et al. | Sep 1979 | A |
4173071 | Ishida | Nov 1979 | A |
4180162 | Magney | Dec 1979 | A |
4270416 | Thompson | Jun 1981 | A |
4318473 | Sandel | Mar 1982 | A |
4386457 | Coombs | Jun 1983 | A |
4395807 | Eldridge, Jr. et al. | Aug 1983 | A |
D273615 | Maskrey | Apr 1984 | S |
4466539 | Frauenhoffer | Aug 1984 | A |
D275833 | Malpass | Oct 1984 | S |
D276462 | Villarreal | Nov 1984 | S |
4730376 | Yamada | Mar 1988 | A |
4746016 | Pollak et al. | May 1988 | A |
4903390 | Vidal et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4930234 | Schmidt | Jun 1990 | A |
4971271 | Sularz | Nov 1990 | A |
4998334 | Pemberton et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5024326 | Sandel et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5036866 | Eldridge, Jr. et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
D319873 | Rouse | Sep 1991 | S |
5071426 | Dolgin et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5088173 | Kromer et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
D327743 | Frenkel et al. | Jul 1992 | S |
D328026 | Stenstrom | Jul 1992 | S |
5163553 | Cantwell et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5193678 | Janocik et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
D334973 | Valentine et al. | Apr 1993 | S |
5207696 | Matwijcow | May 1993 | A |
D337830 | Coyne et al. | Jul 1993 | S |
D341883 | Jones et al. | Nov 1993 | S |
D343687 | Houghton et al. | Jan 1994 | S |
5275606 | Abidin et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5299357 | Wonderley et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5312429 | Noack | May 1994 | A |
5330492 | Haugen | Jul 1994 | A |
5330494 | Van Der Westhuizen et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
D349204 | Lefebvre | Aug 1994 | S |
5346677 | Risk | Sep 1994 | A |
5361902 | Abidin et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5363958 | Horan | Nov 1994 | A |
5370654 | Abidin et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
D355513 | Posenauer | Feb 1995 | S |
5417704 | Wonderley | May 1995 | A |
5431672 | Cote et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5433321 | Abidin et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5449068 | Gharibian | Sep 1995 | A |
D366527 | Paterson | Jan 1996 | S |
5482067 | Wittrock et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
D369295 | Kobari et al. | Apr 1996 | S |
5527329 | Gharibian | Jun 1996 | A |
D372782 | Spehalski | Aug 1996 | S |
D374282 | Hoftman | Oct 1996 | S |
5569281 | Abidin et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5571127 | Decampli | Nov 1996 | A |
D376647 | Marsh et al. | Dec 1996 | S |
D378408 | Pyeatt et al. | Mar 1997 | S |
5662221 | Abidin et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5662669 | Abidin et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5667067 | Gabriel | Sep 1997 | A |
5683407 | Jolly | Nov 1997 | A |
D387177 | Davis | Dec 1997 | S |
5699908 | Frye et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5706942 | Vila et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5729879 | Hoftman | Mar 1998 | A |
5741289 | Jolly et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5752968 | Jolly et al. | May 1998 | A |
5765470 | Sitro | Jun 1998 | A |
5791472 | Davis | Aug 1998 | A |
5792162 | Jolly et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5827309 | Jolly et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
D402767 | Davis et al. | Dec 1998 | S |
5868771 | Newman et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5875532 | Musgrave et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5875533 | Henry | Mar 1999 | A |
5938027 | Soroff et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5938676 | Cohn et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5941892 | Cohn et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5964161 | Conway | Oct 1999 | A |
5968663 | Muggli | Oct 1999 | A |
6212803 | Key | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6216868 | Rastegar et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
D441192 | Park | May 2001 | S |
6254621 | Shackelford et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
D449685 | Morrison | Oct 2001 | S |
D450130 | Goldstein | Nov 2001 | S |
D450391 | Hunt et al. | Nov 2001 | S |
6426041 | Smith | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6589258 | Pilo et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
D479328 | Reynolds et al. | Sep 2003 | S |
6626925 | Newman et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
D481129 | DiCesare et al. | Oct 2003 | S |
6629985 | Kiehne | Oct 2003 | B1 |
D482788 | Montgomery et al. | Nov 2003 | S |
6645216 | Masury et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
D483123 | Montgomery et al. | Dec 2003 | S |
D489454 | Koseki | May 2004 | S |
D490153 | Montgomery et al. | May 2004 | S |
6757977 | Dambal et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
D504175 | Westbrook | Apr 2005 | S |
6955002 | Sandel et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
7036660 | Abidin et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7070051 | Kanner et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
D528206 | Bierman | Sep 2006 | S |
D535026 | Griffin et al. | Jan 2007 | S |
7155795 | Abidin et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7156231 | Austria | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7159713 | Austria | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7172611 | Harding et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7201760 | Masury et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7207999 | Griffin et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
D542415 | Sandel | May 2007 | S |
D544600 | Wentling | Jun 2007 | S |
D549327 | Aparici et al. | Aug 2007 | S |
7303568 | Jannot | Dec 2007 | B2 |
D561898 | Goto | Feb 2008 | S |
7346989 | Shi | Mar 2008 | B2 |
D568475 | Sandel et al. | May 2008 | S |
D568491 | Koseki | May 2008 | S |
D568492 | Koseki | May 2008 | S |
D568493 | Koseki | May 2008 | S |
7398880 | Henry | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7441655 | Hoftman | Oct 2008 | B1 |
D583821 | Richter | Dec 2008 | S |
7458177 | Sandel et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
D596311 | Antons | Jul 2009 | S |
D608015 | Sandel | Jan 2010 | S |
D608456 | Sandel | Jan 2010 | S |
D612050 | Baynham | Mar 2010 | S |
D616089 | Van der Stappen | May 2010 | S |
7713280 | Marshall et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
D618821 | Larsen | Jun 2010 | S |
D621502 | Downs | Aug 2010 | S |
D630317 | Wung | Jan 2011 | S |
D636894 | Tomes et al. | Apr 2011 | S |
D638137 | Gross et al. | May 2011 | S |
D638940 | Palmer et al. | May 2011 | S |
RE42507 | Wilkinson et al. | Jun 2011 | E |
D648852 | Shi | Nov 2011 | S |
D650912 | Tomes et al. | Dec 2011 | S |
8114103 | Rasco | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8156653 | Austria | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8205340 | Austria et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
D662989 | Vulgamott et al. | Jul 2012 | S |
D676146 | Austria | Feb 2013 | S |
D676573 | Austria | Feb 2013 | S |
8372503 | Austria et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
D683407 | Austria | May 2013 | S |
D683452 | Davies et al. | May 2013 | S |
D703626 | Hermansen | Apr 2014 | S |
D710497 | Pham et al. | Aug 2014 | S |
D712062 | Austria | Aug 2014 | S |
D712063 | Austria | Aug 2014 | S |
D712064 | Austria | Aug 2014 | S |
D713958 | Srinivasan et al. | Sep 2014 | S |
8898910 | Ichiyanagi et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8931181 | Milton et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
9113946 | Hajgato et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9622773 | Austria | Apr 2017 | B2 |
20040186496 | Sandel et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040243161 | Kanodia et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050065541 | Abidin et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050204932 | Tingley | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050223640 | Hall et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060027104 | Perez, Jr. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060041267 | Henry | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060100650 | Kiehne | May 2006 | A1 |
20060212058 | Djordjevic et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070039844 | Zyzelewski et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070039845 | Kaforey et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070255298 | Djordjevic et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070265651 | Yi et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080173187 | Baker | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080272023 | McCormick et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090192538 | Sandel et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090267717 | Baskett | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100023040 | Austria | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100137894 | Ueno et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100228274 | Baid | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100268258 | Maxwell | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20120245610 | Hajgato et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120311869 | Ichiyanagi et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130079804 | Milton et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130245656 | Austria | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20150201957 | Shi | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150250492 | Austria | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20160095614 | Austria | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20170181763 | Austria | Jun 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
620691 | Feb 1992 | AU |
846877 | Aug 1960 | GB |
2464751 | May 2010 | GB |
3026909 | Mar 2000 | JP |
3126664 | Jan 2001 | JP |
2002177291 | Jun 2002 | JP |
2006340857 | Dec 2006 | JP |
5390694 | Jan 2014 | JP |
9424020 | Oct 1994 | WO |
2008132762 | Nov 2008 | WO |
2011108099 | Sep 2011 | WO |
2012002910 | Jan 2012 | WO |
Entry |
---|
QlickSmart of Australia, Blade Flask Blade Remover and Blade Cassette, QlickSmart Product Literature, http://qlicksmart.com/English/Home.htm, date unknown, 3 pages. |
Smeak, Daniel et al., Core Surgical Skills: Basic Instrument Use, Texas A&M University School of Veterinary medicine and Biomedical Sciences, 2011, pp. 1-9. |
Swann-Morton, Surgical Blade removal by Swann-Morton, date unknown, 2 pages. |
Trademark Medical, Personal Protective Equipment & Sharps Safety Products: Scalpel Safety, 2010, 2 pages. |
The Official Journal of the Anethesia Patient Safety Foundation, APSF Hosts Medication Safety Conference, vol. 25, No. 1, 1-20, 2010, 7 pages. |
ADV Medical, Needle Counters Selection, date unknown, 2 pages. |
Southmedic, Introducing . . . The only safety scalpel that fits your favorite handle, Safety Cabo, date unkown, 2 pages. |
Tyco Healthcare Group LP, Devon* Needle Counters, 2003, 2 pages. |
Xodus Medical, Needle Counter and Sharps Disposal Systems, date unknown, 4 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20170181763 A1 | Jun 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61685480 | Mar 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13802522 | Mar 2013 | US |
Child | 15455804 | US |