ZipLine Medical has announced that the Zip Surgical Skin Closure has been selected as the Gold Winner in the “Surgical Equipment, Instruments, and Supplies category” of the 2014 Medical Design Excellence Awards (MDEA) competition. The 2014 MDEA winning products were announced at the MDEA Ceremony held June 11th inside the Jacob Javits Convention Center in New York City, USA.
The Zip Surgical Skin Closure offers a non-invasive alternative to staples, sutures and glue for surgical and laceration skin closure, with a reduced risk of infection, closure speed similar to staples, and the cosmetic outcome of suture closure. The device is easy to use and lends itself to delegation of the skin closure task, with a potential time and resource cost savings. As health economics as well as clinical outcomes become more critical for providers, the reduced risk of infection of the Zip can significantly reduce healthcare costs.
“We are honoured to be recognised by the MDEA judges,” says Amir Belson, founder and chief technical officer for ZipLine Medical. “We are proud of our design team for their work in bringing this product to market. The Zip is seeing rapid adoption in the USA, Asia and Europe, and users are appreciating the infection risk reduction, excellent cosmetic outcomes, clinical efficiency and patient satisfaction offered by the non-invasive Zip.” Belson was recently selected as the LSI Life Science Intelligence Emerging Medical Technologies “Innovator of the Month” for May 2014.
Presented by UBM Canon and Medical Device and Diagnostic Industry magazine, the MDEA programme is the MedTech Industry’s Premier Competition for medical device design and innovation. It recognises the achievements of medical device manufacturers, their suppliers, and the many people behind the scenes—engineers, scientists, designers, and clinicians—who are responsible for the ground-breaking innovations that are changing the face of healthcare. MDEA-winning products excel in the areas of product innovation, design and engineering achievement, end-user benefit, and cost-effectiveness in manufacturing and healthcare delivery.
A comprehensive review of the entries was performed by an impartial, multidisciplinary panel of third-party jurors with expertise in biomedical engineering, clinical practice, diagnostics, human factors, industrial design, manufacturing, and medicine. Entries are evaluated on the basis of their design and engineering features, including innovative use of materials, user-related functions that improve healthcare delivery and change traditional medical attitudes or practices, features that provide enhanced benefits to the patient, and the ability of the product development team to overcome design and engineering challenges so that the product meets its clinical objectives.