Mobile Technology In The Lab Trends 2015
|出版日||ページ情報||英文 49 Pages
|実験室におけるモバイル技術の傾向 (2015年) Mobile Technology In The Lab Trends 2015|
|出版日: 2015年04月23日||ページ情報: 英文 49 Pages||
当レポートでは、世界各地 - 米国・欧州・日本・アジア諸国など - の実験室における、モバイルデバイスを使った実験装置 (試験装置) の制御・監視機能や自動化システムに関する研究者の見解について調査し、現在の使用状況や関心の有無、求められている機能や構成、モバイルデバイスから実験装置への接続方法のあり方、導入に当たっての障害や条件といった情報を取りまとめてお届けいたします。
This market report summarizes the results of HTStec's industry-wide global web-based benchmarking survey on the use of mobile technology to monitor and control of lab instruments and automated systems carried out in April 2015.
The survey was initiated by HTStec as part of our tracking of emerging life science marketplaces.
The questionnaire was compiled to determine current interest and end-user requirements for mobile applications (apps) used to monitor and control lab instruments and automated systems. The results of the survey are intended to be used by instrument vendors to target their future R&D efforts on mobile technology and will assist them to bring new apps to the customer earlier.
Equal emphasis was given to soliciting opinion from all market segments using mobile technology in their labs or from persons interested in the opportunities presented by monitoring or controlling lab instruments or automated systems via apps.
The survey looked at the following aspects of mobile technology in the lab: broad application areas of respondent's work involving lab instruments; use of mobile devices at work, whether supplied by respondent's organization and where it can be used; % of people in respondents lab with an organization supplied mobile device; whether respondent's organization currently provide any organization-specific apps for a mobile device; current use of any mobile devices at the lab bench to aid research today; organizations currently allowing wifi interfaces between lab instrumentation and a lab network or a mobile device; current use of any instrument vendor supplied mobile device or wifi interface; main advantages of using a mobile app to monitor/control a lab instrument; current use of any mobile apps to monitor or control of lab instruments today; lab instruments or automated systems respondents are most interested in interfacing with mobile devices; functionality required in an app for lab instruments; potential benefits and limitations of mobile apps in instrument monitoring/control; main barriers to change when considering the implementation of mobile apps; preferred mobile device platform; BYOD and download app from app-store versus receive mobile hardware together with app installed; preferred display size for the app; form factors the app must support; platform native app versus a generic web browser based view; use of other apps or internet browser on same hardware where a work-related app is installed; use of a work-related app outside a place of work; when respondents would you like to use a work-related app; what tasks should a mobile app perform; how should the app be connected to the instrument/automated system; how should the app be used i.e. single versus multiple mobile device per instrument; should there be a limit on how many similar lab instruments/automated systems one app can control/monitor; should the mobile app be subservient to the instrument software, to any scheduling software or should it be switchable; are different levels of access necessary when monitoring/controlling an instrument via an app; respondents who face any regulatory or health and safety challenges concerning remote control of instruments; are mobile apps enabling monitoring and control of lab instruments approved for use in respondent's organization; how much are respondents are willing to pay for a mobile lab instrument app; whether there is a need for a remote wireless application on a desktop machine; and any lab instrument/automated system functionality that would be ideally suited to control/monitoring by a mobile device app.
The main questionnaire consisted of 33 mainly simple multi-choice questions. In addition, there were 5 questions related solely to administration/survey demographics.
The survey collected 55 validated responses, of these 75% provided comprehensive input.
Survey responses were geographically split: 36% Europe; 36% North America; 15% Asia (excluding Japan & China); 9% Japan; and 4% Rest of World.
Survey respondents were drawn from persons whose current work involves the use of lab instruments and/or automated systems.
Respondents represented: 18 Pharmaceuticals; 8 University; 6 Biotech; 5 Other; 4 Hospital/Clinic/Medical School; 3 Research Institute; 2 Not-for-Profit; 2 Diagnostics; 2 Agri Biotech/Plant Genomics; 1 Military/ Defense; 1 Government Lab; 1 Contract Research Organization; 1 Veterinary Lab/Animal Biotech; and 1 Chemical Industry.
Most survey respondents had a senior job role or position which was in descending order: 10 lab/research managers; 8 section/group leaders; 7 research scientists; 7 senior scientists/research associates; 6 others; 4 post-docs; 3 principal investigators; 3 department heads; 3 directors; 2 presidents; 1 professor/assistant professor; and 1 PhD/graduate student.
Survey results were expressed as an average of all survey respondents. In addition, where appropriate the data was reanalyzed after sub-division into the following 5 survey groups:
The majority of survey respondent's current work involves both lab instruments and automated systems.
The broad application area where most use of lab instruments resides was drug discovery/screening.
The majority of respondents made use of mobile devices at work, most of these mobile devices were private, and the majority had no restrictions on where they can be used.
A median of 1-25% of people in respondent's organization have a work supplied mobile device.
The majority do not have any organization-specific or work-related apps on their mobile devices.
Only a minority use mobile devices to aid research at the lab bench today.
Only a minority of respondent's organizations allow wifi interfaces between instruments/automation and a lab network or mobile device.
Only a minority currently use an instrument vendor supplied mobile device or wifi interface.
Feedback on the main advantages of using a mobile app to monitor/control a lab instrument/automated system versus a cable connected PC/laptop or an on board touch screen are documented.
Only a minority use mobile apps to monitor or control lab instruments or automated systems today.
The lab instrument most were interested in interfacing with mobile devices were workstations connecting multiple devices.
Monitor the status of a run in progress was rated the functionality most required in a mobile app for lab instruments/automated systems.
User can immediately see if any interaction is needed was rated the most important potential benefits of using a mobile app for lab instruments/automated systems.
Security concerns/risks to organization's IT infrastructure/network was rated the main limitation of enabling mobile device control or monitoring of lab instruments.
Integration with other systems was rated the main barrier to change when considering mobile apps for lab instrument control or monitoring.
The preferred mobile device platform was no preference.
The preferred way to access a work-related app for a mobile device was BYOD and download app from app-store.
Tablet was ranked the most wanted preferred display size of an app.
The form factor an app must most support was the smartphone.
A platform native app was preferred over a generic web browser based view.
The majority think that the user should be able to use other apps or internet browser on the same hardware that a work-related app is installed.
The majority want to be able to use a work-related app outside their place of work.
Most want to use a work-related app mainly during work hours.
The majority want to mobile app for lab instruments/automated systems to both monitor and control functionality.
Most think the mobile app should be connected to the instrument/automated system via a company or organization network or VPN.
The majority think that multiple devices can use the same app; with a median of 4-5 mobile devices using the same app; but it requires creation of specific user roles/responsibilities for error handling.
The majority think apps should be able to control more than one similar instrument/automated system.
Opinion on which software should be the master was split between the instrument itself or switchable.
The majority think there must be different level of access/hierarchy when monitoring/controlling an instrument/automated system via an app.
A minority face health & safety challenges concerning remote control of instruments via a mobile app.
Opinion of whether mobile apps enabling monitoring & control of lab instruments need approval in respondent's organization was mixed.
Most respondents are not willing to pay for a mobile lab instrument app.
The majority see the need for a remote wireless application on a desktop machine.
Feedback on some applications (lab instrument functionality) ideally suited to control/monitoring via a mobile app was listed.
The full report provides the data, details of the breakdown of the responses to each question, and its segmentation. It also highlights some interesting differences between the survey groups.