Engineering topics

Polk, J. D.

Publications and source records attributed to Polk, J. D..

21 records · Page 2

NASA NTRS2006

Moving from Bilateral to Multilateral Medical Operations

When the ISS Integrated Medical Group moved to a multilateral configuration for the ASTROLAB mission, several challenges were encountered and overcome that allowed for a streamlined operational experience. Dating back to the early 1990s, the European Space Agency (ESA) has sent flight surgeon and Biomedical Engineering (BME) personnel to NASA-JSC and Russia to train for space flight operational support. This training was tailored towards the needs of particular Shuttle/Soyuz missions, and more generally for eventual ISS support. With the announcement of the ASTROLAB mission, NASA and ESA personnel worked together to develop a detailed training template for ESA BMEs to ensure successful support of the mission from the European Astronaut Center (EAC). This training included the deployment of ESA BMEs to JSC, as well as the development of a rotation of ISS-certified NASA BMEs to the EAC. In addition to training, NASA, ESA, and the Russian Federal Space Agency (FSA) worked together preflight to develop multilateral flight control support concepts and implementation plans. This resulted in flight control support schedules, operational rules of engagement, and the delineation of responsibilities. NASA also assisted ESA with the development and deployment of workstation displays to allow the ESA medical flight control team to monitor ISS telemetry from the EAC. The goal of this presentation is to provide details of the preflight preparation and in-flight support of the ASTROLAB mission by the ESA, NASA, and FSA medical support teams. In addition, it will identify lessons learned that will be implemented for future multilateral endeavors.

Roden, S.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Autonomous Medical Care for Exploration

The goal of Autonomous Medical Care (AMC) is to ensure a healthy, well-performing crew which is a primary need for exploration. The end result of this effort will be the requirements and design for medical systems for the CEV, lunar operations, and Martian operations as well as a ground-based crew health optimization plan. Without such systems, we increase the risk of medical events occurring during a mission and we risk being unable to deal with contingencies of illness and injury, potentially threatening mission success. AMC has two major components: 1) pre-flight crew health optimization and 2) in-flight medical care. The goal of pre-flight crew health optimization is to reduce the risk of illness occurring during a mission by primary prevention and prophylactic measures. In-flight autonomous medical care is the capability to provide medical care during a mission with little or no real-time support from Earth. Crew medical officers or other crew members provide routine medical care as well as medical care to ill or injured crew members using resources available in their location. Ground support becomes telemedical consultation on-board systems/people collect relevant data for ground support to review. The AMC system provides capabilities to incorporate new procedures and training and advice as required. The on-board resources in an autonomous system should be as intelligent and integrated as is feasible, but autonomous does not mean that no human will be involved. The medical field is changing rapidly, and so a challenge is to determine which items to pursue now, which to leverage other efforts (e.g. military), and which to wait for commercial forces to mature. Given that what is used for the CEV or the Moon will likely be updated before going to Mars, a critical piece of the system design will be an architecture that provides for easy incorporation of new technologies into the system. Another challenge is to determine the level of care to provide for each mission type. The level of care refers to the amount and type of care one will render based on perceived need and ability. This is in contrast to the standard of care which is the benchmark by which that care is provided. There are certainly some devices and procedures that have unique microgravity or partial gravity requirements such that terrestrial methods will not work. For example, performing CPR on Mars cannot be done in exactly the same way as on Earth because the reduced gravity causes too large a reduction in the forces available for effective compression of the chest. Likewise, fluid behavior in microgravity may require a specialized water filtration and mixing system for the creation of intravenous fluids. This paper will outline the drivers for the design of the medical care systems, prioritization and planning techniques, key system components, and long term goals.

Johnson-Throop, Kathy A.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Space Suit Electrocardiographic Electrode Selection: Are commercial electrodes better than the old Apollo technology?

The NASA Manned Space Program uses an electrocardiograph (ECG) system to monitor astronauts during extravehicular activity (EVA). This ECG system, called the Operational Bioinstrumentation System (OBS), was developed during the Apollo era. Throughout the Shuttle program these electrodes experienced failures during several EVAs performed from the Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) airlocks. An attempt during Shuttle Flight STS-109 to replace the old electrodes with new commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) disposable electrodes proved unsuccessful. One assumption for failure of the STS-109 COTS electrodes was the expansion of trapped gases under the foam electrode pad, causing the electrode to be displaced from the skin. Given that our current electrodes provide insufficient reliability, a number of COTS ECG electrodes were tested at the NASA Altitude Manned Chamber Test Facility. Methods: OBS disposable electrodes were tested on human test subjects in an altitude chamber simulating an Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) operating pressure of 4.3 psia with the following goals: (1) to confirm the root cause of the flight certified, disposable electrode failure during flight STS-109. (2) to identify an adequate COTS replacement electrode and determine if further modifications to the electrodes are required. (3) to evaluate the adhesion of each disposable electrode without preparation of the skin with isopropyl alcohol. Results: There were several electrodes that failed the pressure testing at 4.3psia, including the electrodes used during flight STS-109. Two electrodes functioned well throughout all testing and were selected for further testing in an EMU at altitude. A vent hole placed in all electrodes was also tested as a possible solution to prevent gas expansion from causing electrode failures. Conclusions: Two failure modes were identified: (1) foam-based porous electrodes entrapped air bubbles under the pad (2) poor adhesion caused some electrodes to fail

Redmond, M.↗