Extracorporeal Artificial Lungs: Co-Creating Future Technology – A Qualitative Analysis

Figures & data

Figure 1 Person (1.54m height) wearing the dummy.

Table 1 Characteristics Table

Etiology	Online Questionnaire (n=604)	F2F Questionnaire (n=17)
Demographics
Age (Mean ± SD)	(n=543) 59.58 (± 11.87)	63.65 (± 9.65)
Height (Mean ± SD)	(n= 459) 167.92 (± 9.28)	162.53 (± 11.37)
Weight (Mean ± SD)	(n=451) 75.92 (± 20.31)	68.88 (± 15.68)
Gender
Female (n, %)	337 (55.79%)	11 (64.71%)
Male (n, %)	188 (31.13%)	6 (35.29%)
Not given (n, %)	79 (13.08%)	–
Country of residence
Germany (n, %)	329 (54.47%)	7 (41.18%)
France (n, %)	173 (28.64%)	10 (58.82%)
Other (n, %)	22 (3.64%)	–
Not given (n, %)	80 (13.25%)	–
Questionee status
With COPD (n, %)	394 (65.23%)	10 (58.82%)
With PH (n, %)	52 (8.61%)	7 (41.18%)
Relative (n, %)	71 (11.75%)	–
Not given (n, %)	87 (14.40%)	–
Current smoking status
Smokes currently (n, %)	78 (12.91%)	–
Currently non-smoker (n, %)	335 (55.46%)	–
Not given (n, %)	191 (31.62%)	–
Number of current non-smokers who smoked in the past (n, %)	287 (85.67%)	–

Notes: Headings and Categories in Bold. The Table Shows Mean ± SD (Standard Deviation) of Demographics.

Figure 2 Walking distance in relation to the mean suffering pressure.

Figure 3 Average need of help peer week in relation to the mean suffering pressure of relatives.

Figure 4 Mean suffering pressure in relation to the answer if they would undergo the surgery for the implantation of the oxygenator.

Figure 5 Walking distance in relation to the answer if they would undergo the surgery for the implantation of the oxygenator.

Table 2 Feedback for the Manufacturer of the F2F Participants (Headings and Categories in Bold)

Feedback for the Manufacturer of the F2F Participants
Size and weight
The device should be smaller, less impressive and lighter.
“Carry on in that direction”. Wish for a more flexible system. Current main fault is its size.
Reduce at most the size.
Reduce the weight of the device.
The weight is disturbing, and the tubes are too big. Everything smaller would be nice.
Desire for a more compact and lighter device.
Carrying method
To be able to put the device aside and to remove it completely.
No scratch, but instead: pockets or bags. “If it improves everyday life, design is secondary”.
Maybe a side carrying would be better.
Safety aspects
Protection of the tubes and less large tubes is required.
Provision of safety measures in case of panic or accidental disconnection of the tubes.
Other
“There is a market for it, but it most become a torture, not too heavy, must be combined with another support system, the device must support the patient and make him fitter, it is worth remembering that this device may have a cooling effect”.
“It evokes me the end of life. It´s an ultimate solution. Because there is no more autonomy with this device there”.