As the Ebola outbreak in West Africa claims thousands, tertiary education reporter Vaughan Elder takes a closer look at what may be a timely invention.
Maybe in a high alert situation like now, you might be able to take those people [with high temperatures] aside and run a test on our device, which could indicate whether they are infectious or notIT'S not much to look at, but a brick-sized device developed at the University of Otago could be a game-changer during epidemics.
Dubbed Freedom4, the device can quickly detect the presence of viruses and bacteria using a method called qPCR.
What makes the device so unique is previously this diagnostic technique has been done using large machines that need to be plugged into the wall.
In contrast, Freedom4 is portable, runs off battery power, and can send diagnostic results back to the lab via smartphone.
This could be hugely important during epidemic outbreaks for scientists doing field work and, down the track, could result in patients being diagnosed with an illness without leaving home.
It took a multidisciplinary team at Otago University six years of work and five prototypes to get the product to the point where Paul Pickering, from the company Ubiquitome, took up the technology with the view to selling it to the world.
Department of anatomy senior research fellow Dr Jo-Ann Stanton, who took over as project leader from Prof David Green, who left it in 2009, was confident the device would be used during epidemics.
Whether it was given regulatory approval for use on humans in time to be used during the Ebola outbreak, the ''high mobility'' nature of today's world meant the threat of epidemics was always there.
''If you look through our recent history. we have had pandemic flus, we have had Sars, we have now got the Ebola threat.
''There is no reason to think that there won't be others.''
The big plus of using Freedom4, as opposed to having to collect samples in the field and then take them back to the lab, was the time it saved.
During an outbreak of a deadly disease, saving time meant saving lives and stopping a disease from spreading.
The fact it was web-enabled meant several teams could be using the device in the field, sending results via the cloud to a central point, where people could begin to see an ''overall pattern''.
''They may see that it's not just this particular place that has got the infection, but there is also another place 100km away and we may need to get samples between those two points, to see whether we have got a continuous infection front.
''It starts to enable a different way to operate.''
It could also be used in airports, where people would have to wait only 60 to 90 minutes to find out whether they had a specific disease.
''... walk off a plane and they take your temperature with an infrared.
''Maybe in a high alert situation like now you might be able to take those people [with high temperatures] aside and run a test on our device, which could indicate whether they are infectious or not.''
An advantage of using qPCR technology was that a test could be developed for a specific pathogen very quickly, potentially within days, once it had been identified.
Dr Stanton said having such a small team working on a project like theirs would be considered unusual elsewhere in the world.
This was something Mr Pickering, who previously worked at United States biotechnology company Life Technologies, immediately noticed.
''He will say he had teams of people ... doing each part of what we have done,'' she said.
Having such a small team came with its advantages, especially when it came to communication.
''Making sure the whole system works is one of the biggest challenges for a big group of people. Because you have got so many people, they all go off in different directions and then you have got to pull it all together again.
''We don't have quite the same trouble,'' she said.
When the project started based on Prof Green's vision six years ago, reaching the point where they are now seemed a ''very tall ask''.
''You know the story; overnight successes take 10 years to get going,'' she said.
But, despite working on such an ambitious project, the group, which had Government backing of $10 million, never doubted its goal was achievable.
''These guys are incredibly talented. They see the whole picture and we all know our roles and are really keen to see this succeed.''
She was hugely excited about getting the product to the point where a test which once had to be carried out in the lab could be done ''standing in a rainforest in the Amazon''.
''I'm passionate about this opening up so many opportunities.''
Packing so much tecnology into such a small package was the heart of the challenge.
The device uses a technology called qPCR, which involves setting up a test to make millions of copies of ''a very precise piece of DNA'', which is diagnostic for something - for instance, Ebola.
This involves using a laser to excite the reaction and collecting the light from that reaction.
At the same time, the reaction needs to be heated to almost 100degC and then cooled to 50degC or 60degC in a cycle that runs 40 times.
''We have to do [each cycle] in the space of less than a minute.''
This involved a ''massive power draw'', but improvements in battery technology meant it could run for six hours before it needed a charge.
''When we started, there was no way these could hold charge for longer than an hour.
''As battery technology has improved, we have been able to do more and more, but it's also required us to be very careful about how we manage power.''
The man given the task of finding a way to squeeze the technology into such a small frame was physicist Dr Chris Rawle.
''Everything that you see is something that I have had to think of, design and patent and so on,'' Dr Rawle said.
''It's solving the optical problems, the thermal problems and mechanical and electrical problem.''
Having such a small team meant he had to do more than he otherwise would.
''We couldn't afford to hire anyone else, so I had to step up and do the electronics and mechanics as well.
''It is unusual, but I think it might be typical of New Zealand in some ways, insofar as if you were in the [United] States, you would probably have a 10 or 20-strong team, with various divisions and departments.''
