Companies Urge More Spectrum for Wireless Medical Devices
High tech companies and medical device makers want a band for MedRadio to achieve wireless devices’ full potential, they told the FCC. Several parties asked for more spectrum than the 5 MHz expected to be reserved for the devices. Commenters also asked the Commission to tweak the rules to make them as useful as possible.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
In July, the FCC proposed a service for medical devices in the 401-406 MHz band, setting aside 5 MHz of spectrum and adding 2 MHz to that allotted to the medical implant communications service (MICS) band. In a notice of inquiry at the same time, the FCC sought comment on related developments and spectrum needs in medical devices.
More spectrum should be set aside so wireless simulators can help paraplegics stand and can restore quadriplegics’ use of their hands, said the Alfred Mann Foundation (AMF) for Scientific Research. In what some termed as the most forward looking comment filing, AMF described its work on a wireless wideband microstimulator designed to work as an artificial nervous system.
“New wireless… devices offer nothing short of a revolutionary technology that could fundamentally improve the quality of life for millions of seriously disabled people, as well as significantly alleviate the impact of skyrocketing medical costs,” AMF said, declaring a 5 MHz set-aside too little. To see widespread use, the devices must conserve battery power by transmitting and receiving data in very brief bursts, requiring multiple broad channels. With today’s technology, microstimulator implant devices require at least three 4.96 MHz-wide channels to operate, AMF said.
GE Healthcare also wants more than the 5 MHz set aside to encourage development of body sensor networks (BSNs) using wireless technology linking monitors to sensors worn on the body for temperature, pulse, glucose level, echocardiogram and blood pressure readings. The GE unit said wireless monitoring will lead to “increased patient comfort and mobility, more holistic monitoring, reduced risk of infection and improved caregiver effectiveness.”
“For BSNs to deliver on their full potential, additional spectrum from that which is currently available and proposed will be required,” the GE affiliate said: “Economies-of- scale could develop to make the benefits of BSNs available at all levels of the health care system.”
The 2 main hurdles to this vision are keeping power use low to minimize battery life and preventing interference - an anathema to many medical uses of wireless technology, Intel said. A medical device band would foster devices helping many patients, Intel said: “The Commission should define the types of devices that may use the MedRadio service in order to minimize complications that could arise if this spectrum was exploited for non-medical usage.”
Commenters objected to rules the FCC proposed. DexCom, a maker of implants that wirelessly monitor and report glucose levels, questioned the wisdom of creating 2 tiers of device operating in different spectrum bands. “The stated reasons for the bifurcation of medical implant devices are not supported, as the risk of interference from devices such as those of DexCom -- i.e., devices that transmit on a single frequency with a low duty cycle -- is minuscule,” it said.
Don’t segregate listen-before-transmit (LBT) devices from low-power, low-duty-cycle (LPLDC) devices, device maker Biotronik said: “Such segregation would be a departure from Commission policy of encouraging flexible spectrum use, and would in fact prohibit the important benefits and efficiencies that would result from combining LBT and LPLDC operating modes in a single device.”