The recent interview of "Evening Bishkek" with Professor Rustam Tukhvatshin, a laureate of the State Prize of Kyrgyzstan in the field of science and technology, has sparked significant interest and discussions in society. The topic of implementing scientific achievements into practice has proven to be relevant and important for the medical community.
Continuing this important topic, VB.KG conducted an interview with Akylbek Usupbaev, the director of the Republican Scientific Center of Urology at the National Hospital, head of the Department of Urology and Andrology at KGMA, and a corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences. He holds a leading position among inventors in Kyrgyzstan.
Akylbek Cholponkulovich, despite the presence of numerous inventions and innovative developments in the country, authors often complain about the lack of practical application of their ideas. What is the reason for this? What difficulties arise in the implementation of inventions?
- I myself hold 56 patents for inventions, and some of them have already attracted the attention of well-known medical journals that request materials about my developments in surgical urology, which bring real benefits to patients. My colleagues and I propose new treatment methods for various diseases. However, to promote our technologies, especially on the international stage, we need the support of the state and "Kyrgyzpatent".
Unfortunately, we do not feel such support. The situation seems quite strange to me. Previously, innovations and inventions were evaluated by our domestic team of experts, and research was conducted with the support of the World Intellectual Property Organization. Now, however, "Kyrgyzpatent" redirects our applications to the Eurasian Patent Organization, and only if they are approved there will we receive a patent. A process that used to take a year now takes three years.
I am convinced that this is incorrect. Innovations should remain in Kyrgyzstan until they receive official approval. Otherwise, we risk losing all our scientific ideas and developments by submitting them for review to foreign experts. Our innovative technologies should remain a national asset, and it is our specialists who should assess their significance.
So, is inventing not the most profitable endeavor?
- Our ideas are not protected and not promoted properly. "Kyrgyzpatent" should be engaged in their evaluation and sale, but, as I have already noted, this support is lacking. So why does such a structure as "Kyrgyzpatent" exist? Currently, it only serves as an intermediary between our inventors and the Eurasian Patent Organization.
What is the situation with already obtained patents?
- In most cases, patents remain with the inventors themselves, as the implementation of new ideas encounters many obstacles, primarily financial ones. Inventing in our country often turns out to be unprofitable. Although all these costs should be recouped, in practice this happens very rarely. Patents are not in demand in our market; however, their usefulness, especially in medicine, lies in the improvement of diagnostic and treatment technologies. We, urologist surgeons, hold medical conferences and master classes to teach colleagues new methods, and this brings moral satisfaction, although patents themselves do not yield profits.
Unfortunately, in remote regions such as the Talas region, the lack of necessary equipment deprives doctors of the opportunity to apply innovations. Young specialists are not interested in working where there are no prospects for development and modern equipment, even if they are offered a high salary.
What motivates you to continue inventing and developing technologies if you do not see material benefits?
- It is love for the profession. No matter how banal it sounds, most of us cannot live without the hospital atmosphere, without surgical activity and helping patients. I experience deep satisfaction after a successful operation, knowing that my developments help people.
We successfully apply new treatment methods, but, as you rightly noted, patents do not bring profit. It may help the patient, but I, as the author, receive nothing. To publish our developments in journals indexed in Scopus, one must go through many stages and spend significant funds – from one to five thousand dollars. And who among my colleagues can afford such expenses?
Together with Doctor of Medical Sciences Renat Kurmanaliev, we developed a surgical technique for strictures (stenosis) of the renal pelvis-ureter segment in men. We performed autoplasty using the tunica vaginalis and achieved excellent results. Our method has attracted the interest of several American journals that expressed a desire to collaborate. But unfortunately, we do not know how to promote our ideas and do not have the time for it. As Professor Tukhvatshin rightly noted, we need specialists who could promote and sell our developments to enhance the image of Kyrgyzstan and bring income to both the country and the authors of inventions. Even if the author receives 10% of the profit, it would already be a significant support. Otherwise, we are left with patents and do not know how to implement them, but we can teach our colleagues the methods that benefit our patients.
