Medical Device Link.

Originally Published PMPN September 2004

NEWS

The concept of universal package design seems simple. Katherine Gough, research associate at the Helen Hamlyn Research Centre at the Royal College of Art (London), says it’s really just “a process whereby designers ensure that their products and services address the needs of the widest possible audience.” 

However, translating that concept into a successful package design can be a major challenge, according to Gough. She discussed that challenge along with 18 other presenters at Universal Package: Designing Packaging For Everyone, a conference held June 16–17 in Lansing, MI. It was presented by The School of Packaging at Michigan State University.

Speakers touched on topics such as cognition and design, biomechanics and aging, perception and aging, and consumer trends in packaging. Special emphasis was given to changes that occur in perception and cognition and its effect on use of packages. Several speakers urged designers to pay more attention to the human condition when designing packages. Some of the conference’s key presentations included:

“Obstacles in Packaging” by Ellen Weaver, executive director for Capital Area Center for Independent Living (Lansing, MI). Weaver addressed the independent living market and how packaging can become a barrier to independent living for some. She presented interviews with several residents who complained about the difficulty of opening everyday packages.

“Senior-Friendly Child-Resistant (CR) Packaging” by Suzanne Barone, PhD, project manager for poison prevention, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Barone discussed a 1986 poisoning study that showed the majority of incidents occurred in non-CR packaging. She also urged designers to strive for a balance between adult-use effectiveness and child-resistance.

“Successful Child-Resistant/Senior-Friendly Packages” by Lori Dixon, PhD, Great Lakes Marketing (Toledo, OH), a packaging research firm. Dixon stressed that the opening process must be intuitive and responsive enough to guide a senior adult with failing eyesight and waning dexterity. In addition, she told designers to reduce the number of package locations that can be leveraged by children. She also urged them to eliminate gaps that offer space to pry.

“Biomechanics and Aging” by Tamara Reid-Bush, PhD, department of mechanical engineering, Michigan State University. Her presentation focused on how the body is affected by the aging process. She told attendees to incorporate this information into package designs to produce effective packages. For example, aging often causes deterioration of the ability to grasp small objects. That should inspire designers to think more about such dilemmas when they design.

“A Pharmaceutical Package Design Dilemma: Child-Resistant Blister” by Rich Hollander, MS, senior director of packaging services, Pfizer Inc. (New York City). Hollander recommended that CPSC should participate in the standard-setting process. He also recommended a guidance that defers to ASTM specifications regarding good-faith reliance on recognized ASTM standards.

“Packaging Design Challenges” by Renard Jackson, executive vice president of sales and business development, Packaging Services, Cardinal Health (Philadelphia, PA). Jackson revealed data from four case studies. The studies focused on compliance, unit-dose bar codes, topical unit-dose delivery packages, and a home therapy rheumatoid arthritis kit.

“Home Comforts” by Katherine Gough. She recommended developing packages that include the needs of older and disabled users while aiming their appeal to everybody.

Copyright ©2004 Pharmaceutical & Medical Packaging News