Page 33 - An Innovation Spirit ...
P. 33
Dr. Barry The Innovation Fund provided the Dr. Barry, Dr. Barry including physicians, surgeons,
Rubin (left) $150,000 needed to pilot the blood- Rubin, approached scientists, a nurse practitioner,
and Dr. Harry conservation project at the PMCC, cardiologist Dr. Harry a psychologist, administrators,
Rakowski and Dr. Karkouti says that funding Rakowski to create a entrepreneurs and real estate
(right) are the was essential to make the project a new program to fund developers. Everybody gets an equal
architects reality. “It not only made it fast, [but] innovation, they both vote – thumbs-up or thumbs-down.
of the Peter it also made it possible,” he says. agreed that they wanted
Munk Cardiac to do things differently. “Usually, I try to pair a medical person
Centre’s “Within a year, we had a permanent Dr. Rubin thought and a business person to evaluate
unique and new program, and that’s unheard that Innovation Fund proposals, so that somebody can always
successful of,” says Dr. Karkouti. In addition, committee members explain the science, and the other
Innovation the pilot project’s positive results should include health- can look at it from a business point of
Fund, a vehicle helped Dr. Karkouti get a Canadian care providers, who view,” says Dr. Rakowski. “Does the
for staff to Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) would assess if proposals idea make sense? Can they achieve
submit and grant to run a multicentre study made sense from a what they want to achieve with the
test innovative of the blood-conservation project medical point of view, funds they will have? Is it sustainable,
ideas. in 12 hospitals across Canada. It’s and people from the so they can likely get more funding for
only been three years from the pilot business world who a larger-scale study that will impact
Winter 2015 project’s inception, and results of the might not have significant care? And, from a personal patient
larger study are almost finalized. medical knowledge, but perspective, is this just a good idea?”
who “know a winner
“Based on my experience, similar when they see it.” Because of the mix of medical and
projects would normally take at least business committee members, the
five to 10 years to get through,” says Dr. “If we’re going to Innovation Committee had been dubbed
Karkouti. “If the multicentre results are support innovation, “the Dragons’ Den of health care.” Jordan
positive, it’s going to change practice let’s do it in an Dermer, co-founder and managing
across North America by next year.” innovative way,” says partner at Capital Developments, a
Dr. Rakowski, lead for Toronto-based real estate development
It’s the kind of success story for which the PMCC’s Innovation firm, is one of the business leaders on
the Innovation Fund was created. Fund program. “We the Innovation Committee, and he says
see ourselves as being there is some truth to the comparison.
A Dragons’ Den approach thought leaders for
the country and “The debates are healthy, but, unlike
When the PMCC’s Medical Director, internationally, we try Dragons’ Den, we’re not trying to
to lead the development make money on their ideas,” says
of projects and we have Mr. Dermer. “It’s interesting when
people who are capable you get two doctors debating on two
of doing that. But the questions are: different sides of an issue, and it gets
‘How do you bring those ideas forward? a little hot in the kitchen. But, in
And how do we vet those ideas?’” the end, we all walk away smiling,
Generous donors had supplied and there are no hard feelings.”
$5-million to get the program off the
ground. Dr. Rubin and Dr. Rakowski Another unique part of the program is
decided that the new Innovation that, while most funding bodies reject
Fund would be open to all 1,000 unsuccessful applicants without so much
people working at the PMCC, from as an explanation, the PMCC Innovation
cardiac surgeons to physiotherapists. Fund gives constructive input, both
Unlike typical granting bodies that before and after the submission process.
require pages of detailed proposals,
applicants would only need to answer “If you submit something, and we think
10 questions about their project, you could do it better, cheaper, whatever,
with submissions accepted quarterly. we’re going to give you that constructive
That makes the Innovation Fund input,” says Dr. Rakowski. “We’ll let
nimble and able to rapidly support you resubmit or put you in touch with
evaluation of new ideas and medical people who can make it better.”
devices, says Dr. Rubin. The fund
would also change the way proposals Since the Innovation Fund program
are typically assessed in a hospital. started three years ago, they’ve awarded
“Rather than [vetting ideas] in the $1-million per year to a total of 31
traditional way – a physician and recipients, with approximately 80 per
an executive sit down and make cent of applications being funded, in
the decision – we would make the comparison with the 15% funding rate
process more broad-based, with both for projects submitted to the Canadian
physicians and non-physicians on a Institutes of Health Research. For
committee that reflect diverse interests example, the Transcatheter Aortic Valve
and skill sets,” says Dr. Rakowski. Implantation (TAVI) procedure – a
The Innovation Committee is non-invasive surgical technique that
currently made up of 14 people, can be performed while the patient
is awake – has become a viable way
to replace failing valves for patients
who are too unwell for open heart
surgery. Other successes include
iHeartChange.org, a website for young
31
