Abstract:
An intelligent touch-sensitive surface that is easy to clean, that self-monitors when it has become contaminated, and can discern when it has been cleaned. The surface incorporates a plurality of sensors that detect events that contribute to contamination and/or cleaning, including, but not limited to, detecting users&#39; touches, movement of the surface, when liquid is present on the surface, when there has been a change of users, time passage since the last cleaning, and how well the surface was wiped. The surface then reports its cleaning status to software residing on a host computer, which in turn can transfer the information to a host server. In this way, the cleaning status of each surface can be monitored remotely and/or logged.

Description:
PRIORITY CLAIM 
     This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/434,772 filed Jan. 20, 2011. This application is also a Continuation-In-Part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/234,053 filed Sep. 19, 2008. 
    
    
     BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     With the proliferation of infections in healthcare settings that are difficult to cure, it has become necessary to find ways to clean and disinfect commonly-touched surfaces in order to reduce cross contamination leading to hospital-acquired infections. Hospital-acquired infections result in over 100,000 deaths every year in North America, making it one of the leading causes of death. They also cost the healthcare system in excess of $35 billion dollars annually in caring for patients who have contracted infections in healthcare facilities. To combat these high costs, most healthcare institutions have policies requiring frequent cleaning and disinfection of commonly-touched surfaces, including medical and electronic devices. 
     But providing cleanable surfaces is only one step in proper infection control protocol. Another important step is that healthcare workers must actually follow the prescribed protocols. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. Many studies have shown compliance to infection-control protocols by healthcare staff, who are often busy and either forget or neglect to follow the proper guidelines, at less than 50%. Other studies have shown a much higher rate of compliance when the process is actively monitored. But it is impractical and expensive to have people monitoring people; a much better approach would be to have the process monitor itself automatically. 
     The computer keyboard, for example, has been shown to be one of the most contaminated common-touch surfaces in the hospital, with one study showing 62% contamination. Other commonly-touched surfaces have also been identified has highly contaminated in healthcare settings, such as pagers, bed railings, door handles, telephones, counter-tops, faucet handles, TV remote controls, cell phones, and tablet computers. It is important that the surfaces of these objects be easy to clean and disinfect. But it is also very important that compliance to the actions of cleaning and disinfection by healthcare staff be actively monitored and reported on. This can lead to a reduction in the spread of infection in healthcare settings, potentially saving lives and significant healthcare costs. 
     In U.S. Pat. No. 7,557,312 Clark et al. (hereinafter Clark) describe a keyboard assembly that has a cover making it easy to clean. Clark further describes a sensor and warning system that is operatively coupled to the keyboard assembly that detects when the number of keystrokes and/or time interval has surpassed a certain maximum and warns the user that it is time to clean the keyboard. The sensor assembly then detects when the user has wiped the surface of the keyboard and clears the warning. This approach is useful in that it prompts the user to clean the keyboard (which it might be assumed results in more frequent cleanings) and also attempts to verify that the cleaning has taken place. 
     There are significant shortcomings however in the approach described by Clark. For example, Clark is specific to a mechanical keyboard with physical keys that travel at least 0.05 inches, making it impossible or impractical to put cleaning sensors on the entire surface of the keyboard. Instead, there are three discrete sensors dispersed over areas of the keyboard where there are no keys. It is a simple matter for a user to identify where these sensors are and fool the system into thinking it has been adequately cleaned by touching only those sensors. The nature of the sensors described (conductive and capacitive) mean a user could simply lick their finger and touch the three sensor areas in order to fool the keyboard into thinking it has been cleaned (the very act of which would in fact make the keyboard more contaminated). A user may be motivated to do this in order to avoid the more laborious task of actually wiping and disinfecting the keyboard. 
     In U.S. Pat. No. 7,157,655, Murzanski describes a cleanable keyboard in which a barrier layer separates the mechanical keys from underlying electronics, allowing the keys to be cleaned with liquids without the potential of harm to said electronics. In a preferred embodiment, the keyboard may be rinsed under running water without damaging the keyboard circuit. The problem with such a solution in a healthcare setting is that few workers take the time to unplug the keyboard, take it to a sink, and clean it. Further, there is no method included to cue the user when such a cleaning is necessary, nor is there any way to automatically monitor when the cleaning takes place. 
     SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
     The present invention provides an intelligent touch-sensitive surface that is easy to clean, that self-monitors when it has become contaminated, and can discern when it has been cleaned. The surface incorporates a plurality of sensors that detect events that contribute to contamination and/or cleaning, including, but not limited to, detecting users&#39; touches, movement of the surface, when liquid is present on the surface, when there has been a change of users, time passage since the last cleaning, and how well the surface was wiped. The surface then reports its cleaning status to software residing on a host computer, which in turn can transfer the information to a host server. In this way, the cleaning status of each surface can be monitored remotely and/or logged. 
     In one embodiment, the surface is configured as a computer keyboard. As described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/234,053 by Marsden, which is hereby incorporated by reference, the surface incorporates touch capacitive sensors as well as vibration sensors to allow the user to rest their fingers on the touch-sensitive surface without selecting. Selections are made by tapping on the surface, as detected by the vibration sensors. These same touch and vibration sensors that are used for detecting the user&#39;s touching and selection actions are also used to detect how dirty the surface is, and how well it has been cleaned. 
     Unlike conventional mechanical keyboards, the present invention can detect not only user selections, but also user touches on the surface (such as resting their fingers). A plurality of touch capacitive sensors are arrayed over the entire surface where they can detect user interaction such as finger resting, sliding, tapping and pressing. This contributes to the determination of surface contamination, since human touch is one of the most significant ways harmful pathogens are spread from surface to surface. 
     The same touch capacitive sensors described above can also detect when the user has wiped the surface, whether or not it was wiped with a liquid, and what type of liquid was used. Marsden describes an exemplary method for detecting a wiping motion. In one aspect of the invention, detection of a wiping motion automatically suspends operation of the device incorporating the touch surface, allowing it to be cleaned. 
     When the surface is dry, the capacitive sensors register a normative or “baseline” value over the entire surface. When liquid is present on the touch surface, the value registered by the touch capacitance sensors is different than the baseline value. Thus, after a wiping motion is detected, the system compares the touch capacitance values with those prior to wiping and can tell if liquid was left behind as a result of the wiping action. This ensures that a user can&#39;t try to “fool” the system by simply performing a wiping motion with their hand over the surface without using cleanser (in which case they would actually be making the surface more contaminated). 
     When the surface is wiped using a liquid, the moisture affects the capacitance of most of the surface uniformly. If, for example, a user has wet fingers, only the areas they touch will be affected by the moisture while the rest of the surface that remains dry will not. This information is used to determine the difference between touching with wet fingers and the surface being wiped with a liquid. 
     As the liquid on the touch surface dries, the capacitance values return to their original baseline state. The evaporation rate varies from liquid to liquid; for example, an alcohol-based cleaner will evaporate much quicker than water. The system monitors the rate of change of the capacitance sensors as the liquid dries and thus is able to estimate what type of liquid is on the surface. This is helpful in determining whether or not a disinfecting cleanser was used as opposed to just water. A manual calibration procedure may be followed to measure the evaporation rate of specific fluids in specific environments, the results of which are stored in a database for reference by the system. 
     Because the touch capacitive sensors are arrayed over the entire surface, they can also be used to determine where the user has wiped. This information is fed back to the user, for example, as a virtual image of the touch surface device on display attached to the touch surface or the display of a computer wherein the color of the virtual surface changes as the real surface is wiped. In an alternative embodiment, an illumination component is configured to illuminate the touch surface at one of a various of colors or intensity. In this way, the user has immediate visual feedback ensuring they have wiped the surface adequately. The system may also incorporate the wipe coverage data into a policy-based rule set to determine when the user has wiped the surface well enough to clear any cleaning alerts that the system may have issued. 
     The surface of the present invention also incorporates accelerometers to detect vibrations and movement. These sensors are primarily used to determine when the user taps on a location of the touch surface to indicate a selection. The accelerometers (or other forms of motion/vibration sensors) can also be used to determine when surface has been moved; a contributing factor to cross-contamination. Motion information is stored by the system and used in collaboration with data from other sensors to determine when the potential contamination of the surface exceeds maximums defined by policies set by the institution. 
     In one aspect of the invention, proximity sensors are used in the touch surface to determine when a human is near the device incorporating the touch surface. As activity around the device increases, so does the probability of contamination. This data can thus be used to contribute to a contamination “score” along with other input described herein. 
     In yet another aspect of the invention, the system determines when there has been a change of user of the device. It does so using a plethora of data from the sensors described herein including, but not limited to, the touch “signatures” of the users fingers, the strength by which they tap on the surface, whether or not they rest their fingers and on what parts of the surface, and the speed at which they make selections. When the system detects a change of user, it increases the contamination score accordingly. 
     Embodiments implementing the cleanable surface described herein can encompass a variety of devices, such as universal infrared remote controls, keyboards, computer mice, pagers, tablet computers, telephones, keypads, door knobs, drawer handles, countertops, bed railings, smartphones, and input surfaces on specialized medical equipment. These “smart surfaces” can also report to a monitoring agent and monitoring service in the manner illustrated in  FIG. 1B . 
     This summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts that are further described below in the detailed description. This summary is not intended to limit the scope of the claimed subject matter. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       Preferred and alternative examples of the present invention are described in detail below with reference to the following drawings: 
         FIG. 1  is a hardware block diagram showing the typical hardware components of a system which embodies the present invention of a cleanable touch surface; and 
         FIGS. 2A through 2C  show a flow diagram of an exemplary process performed by the system shown in  FIG. 1 . 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT 
     The present invention describes methods and systems that electronically monitor and log the contamination status and cleaning status of a cleanable touch surface. This is made possible by sensors that are incorporated into the surface including, but not limited to, capacitive touch sensors, which can be employed to detect when the surface has been cleaned (and how well it has been cleaned). 
       FIG. 1  shows a simplified block diagram of the hardware components of a typical device  100  in which the System and Method for a cleanable touch surface is implemented. The device  100  includes one or more touch sensors  120  that provides input to the CPU (processor)  110  notifying it of contact events when the surface is touched, typically mediated by a hardware controller that interprets the raw signals received from the touch sensor(s) and communicates the information to the CPU  110  using a known communication protocol via an available data port. Similarly, the device  100  includes one or more motion (or vibration) sensors  130  that communicate with the CPU  110  when the surface is tapped, in a manner similar to that of the touch sensor(s)  120 . The CPU  110  communicates with a hardware controller for a visual output  140  to send user alerts. A speaker  150  is also coupled to the CPU  110  so that any appropriate auditory signals can be passed on to the user as guidance. A vibrator  135  is also coupled to the CPU  110  to provide appropriate haptic feedback to the user. The CPU  110  has access to a memory  160 , which may include a combination of temporary and/or permanent storage, and both read-only and writable memory (random access memory or RAM), read-only memory (ROM), writable non-volatile memory such as FLASH memory, hard drives, floppy disks, and so forth. The memory  160  includes program memory  170  that contains all programs and software such as an operating system  171 , contamination monitor software  172 , cleaning monitor software  173 , and any other application programs  174 . The memory  160  also includes data memory  180  that includes a sensor database(s)  181  required by the contamination monitor software  172  and the cleaning monitor software  173 , storage for maintaining a record of user options and preferences  182 , and any other data  183  required by any element of the device  100 . The CPU  110  may send information related to the contamination levels and cleaning status of the cleanable touch surface  100  to external devices or controllers by communicating through a standard communication interface  115 . 
       FIGS. 2A through 2C  show a process flow chart of an exemplary process performed by the contamination monitor software  172  and the cleaning monitor software  173 . The flowcharts shown in  FIGS. 2A to 2C  are not intended to fully detail the software of the present invention in its entirety, but are used for illustrative purposes. 
       FIG. 2A  shows a flow chart of the Main Processing Routine  2100  performed by the contamination monitor software  172  and the cleaning monitor software  173 . At block  2110  the process invokes a Contamination Monitor sub-routine ( FIG. 2B ) to determine the level of contamination on the surface. At block  2120  the system determines whether or not the contamination level exceeds a specified threshold. This threshold is a user-changeable variable that is typically defined via a software control panel or through a user interface provided by the device  100  and stored in user preference memory  182 . If the contamination level has not exceeded the defined threshold, the process returns back to block  2110  to continue monitoring for contamination. 
     If the contamination threshold has been exceeded, the process moves to block  2120  where it outputs an alert according to administrator-defined policy. The alert can take many forms including, but not limited to: visual indicator displayed on the visual output  140  (e.g., display device or device configured to illuminate the touch surface) of the device  100 , an audible alert output on the speaker  150 , a haptic alert output by the vibrator  135 , or data that is sent via the communication interface  115  to external monitoring devices or software. 
     After issuing an alert, the process moves to block  2130  ( FIG. 2C ) where it monitors for cleaning actions taken. In block  2140 , the system decides whether or not cleaning has been sufficient. What is deemed sufficient by the cleaning monitor software  173  is defined by an administrator and stored as a user preference in the memory  182 . If cleaning has not been sufficient, the process returns to block  2130  to continue monitoring for cleaning activities. If the cleaning is sufficient, the process moves to block  2150  where the alert is cleared (or stopped). The process then returns to the start and once again begins monitoring for contamination in block  2110 . 
       FIG. 2B  shows a flowchart of an exemplary process for determining the contamination levels. The routine begins at block  2200  and continues for each contamination criteria in block  2210 . There are many factors determined by the CPU  110  based on sensor and/or other data that can contribute to the cleanable surface becoming contaminated. By way of example, these might include: how often the device incorporating the cleanable surface has been moved, the number of times a different user has used the device, changes to the normative values of the touch sensors, a passage of time, the number of times the surface has been touched, and the number of times a human was detected within the proximity of the device. This list is not intended to be exhaustive and it will be evident to anyone skilled in the art that other criterion for determining contamination exists. Each contamination criteria examined in block  2210  will contribute to a contamination score in block  2220  and the process repeats for each criteria in block  2230 . Once all contamination criteria have been examined, the process returns with a contamination score at block  2240 . 
       FIG. 2C  shows a flowchart of an exemplary process for determining the cleaning levels of the touch surface. The routine begins at block  2300  and retrieves the stored baseline value(s) for the touch capacitive sensors. These are the normative signal levels registered by the sensors when they are dry and not being touched. In one embodiment, the CPU  110  dynamically updates these normative values over time, to adapt to any changes in environment, signal degradation, or other factors which may affect the sensor&#39;s signal. Touch capacitive sensors are particularly useful in this application since the signal registered by each sensor differs if the surface is wet or dry. Thus, they can be used to detect the presence of liquid. When the surface is wiped using a liquid, the moisture effects the capacitance of the surface uniformly. This provides a second means whereby the adequacy of the cleaning of the surface can be determined (in addition to wipe detection). If, for example, a user has wet fingers, only the areas they touch on the surface will be affected by the moisture while other areas that remain dry will not. This information can easily be used to determine the difference between touching with wet fingers and the surface being wiped uniformly with a liquid. 
     The system then watches for a wiping motion in block  2310 . In one embodiment, the CPU  110  determines when the surface has been cleaned by a wiping action. 
     Wipe detection is particularly useful when a user initiates cleaning the surface but has forgotten to pause it first. If the system detects touches that are indicative of a wiping action, it can automatically suspend or pause the operation of the device. In one embodiment, the device has an explicit method for the user to select pause mode, which disables functionality to allow the surface to be cleaned. A user may forget or choose not to activate this mode before cleaning. To accommodate this circumstance, the CPU  110  detects a wiping motion as a moving cluster of adjacent touches occurring simultaneously. As that cluster of touches begins to move, the CPU  110  determines the action to be a wiping motion and functionality of the device is temporarily disabled, allowing the wiping motion to take place without the pause mode being manually activated. 
     If a wiping motion is not detected, the process exits at block  2315 . If a wiping motion is detected, the system suspends operation of the device in block  2320 . In block  2325  the CPU  110  determines if wipe coverage was adequate. For example, if only half of the touch surface was wiped, the CPU  110  automatically ascertains this and judges this wiping action to be an incomplete wipe. 
     In infection sensitive environments, the contamination on the surface may not be visible to the naked human eye. In fact, the most harmful pathogens are almost always invisible. In this circumstance, the user doesn&#39;t have the benefit of seeing where they have or haven&#39;t wiped by simply looking at the presence or absence of contamination. Further, many cleaning liquids are clear again making it difficult for a user to know if they have cleaned the entire surface adequately. 
     To assist with this problem, an embodiment of the cleanable surface incorporates a virtual visual representation of the surface on a display (either attached to the surface or on the screen of a connected computer (the visual output  140 )). This visual representation, sometimes referred to as a “heat map”, changes the color of the virtual surface (or touch surface) wherever a touch occurs. Over time, the more the surface is touched, the more the virtual surface (or touch surface) becomes colored. As the user wipes the cleanable surface, the virtual surface representation provides feedback whereby the colorization is removed corresponding to where the wiping takes place. In effect, the user “erases” the coloring on the virtual surface by wiping the real surface. In this way, they are provided immediate visual feedback as to the adequacy of their wiping action. 
     Once the CPU  110  determines the wiping coverage is adequate, it increments a cleaning “score” in block  2330 . The process continues to block  2335  where the CPU  110  compares the capacitive sensor values right after the wipe is completed with the baseline values retrieved in block  2305 . A uniform difference between all the sensors as determined by the CPU  110  indicates the presence of a liquid on the surface as determined in block  2340 . If no liquid is found to be present, the process adjusts the cleaning score accordingly in block  2341  and then proceeds to block  2380  where the cleaning score is compared with stored policy data. Policy data is typically defined by a facility administrator in which the device is being used. For example, a hospital may choose to have a policy that the surface must be cleaned with a liquid. If no liquid was used then the process would determine that the cleaning was not adequate. The policy data may reside onboard the device  100  in the data memory  182 , or it may be stored external to the device and communicated via the communication interface  115   
     If liquid is detected in block  2340  the process moves to block  2345  where the CPU  110  measures the rate of evaporation of the liquid from the cleanable touch surface. It does this in an effort to determine the type of liquid used to clean the surface. Some policies, for example, may dictate that a certain type of cleanser or disinfectant be used while others may allow only water. The CPU  110  ascertains, to the extent possible, what type of liquid was used during the wiping action. 
     In one embodiment, the CPU  110  uses data from the capacitive sensors in the surface to determine the presence of moisture on the surface. Moisture changes the capacitance of the surface, and can therefore be detected using the touch capacitive sensors in the surface. 
     Further, as the liquid evaporates from the surface, the capacitance on the surface changes accordingly and can be detected by a change in capacitance of the surface&#39;s capacitive touch sensors. By measuring this change, the rate of evaporation is determined and correlated to various known cleaning liquids (such as water and alcohol). For example, the evaporation rate of alcohol is faster than that of water, and so the surface can tell the difference between water and alcohol. Thus, using the evaporation rates of the cleaning liquid, the CPU  110  can determine what type of liquid was used to clean its surface. The rate at which a liquid evaporates is stored as “evaporation signatures” in the data memory sensor database  181 . 
     The rate of evaporation can vary even for the same liquid from environment to environment. For example, most liquids will evaporate slower in a humid, cool environment than they will in a dry, hot environment. To accommodate for this variability, an embodiment of the present invention allows the user to calibrate the surface for the liquid being used and the environment in which it is being used. They do this by putting the device into a “learn” mode and then coat the surface with the liquid. The system then records the rate of evaporation of that liquid in that environment and stores it in the sensor database  1081  for reference in block  2350  of  FIG. 2C . 
     In another embodiment, a local humidity value is retrieved from a local or remote (e.g., website) source via the communication interface  115 . The retrieved humidity value is then used by the CPU  110  to alter the stored evaporation rates. 
     The process determines whether or not the liquid is a known cleanser in block  2355  of  FIG. 2C . If it is a known cleanser, it adjusts the cleaning score accordingly in clock  2360 . If it is not a known cleanser then the CPU  110  determines if the liquid was water in block  2365 , and then adjusts the score accordingly in block  2370  (for water) and block  2375  for not water. In the case of block  2375 , it is an unknown liquid and a flag or warning can be issued prompting the user to identify the liquid and/or carry out a calibration so the CPU  110  can store the evaporation signature of the new liquid. 
     The process continues to block  2380  where the cleaning score is compared with policies stored in user preferences data  182 , or alternatively retrieves the policy data from an external device via the communication interface  115 . It should be noted that the term “cleaning score” is used simply for illustrative purposes, and that in reality a more complex set of rules make up the algorithm that determines whether or not the cleaning has been adequate and meets the requirements of the stored policies. The process then exits at block  2385 . 
     While the preferred embodiment of the invention has been illustrated and described, as noted above, many changes can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Accordingly, the scope of the invention is not limited by the disclosure of the preferred embodiment. Instead, the invention should be determined entirely by reference to the claims that follow.