Microfluidics\u2019 potential role in creating accurate wearable technology is significant.<\/p>\n
For example, the density of metabolites in sweat \u2014 along with its ease of collection from skin pores \u2014 make it a useful biofluidic candidate for analysis. One recent study<\/a> looked at how microchannels and micro reservoirs, pre-filled with fluorescent probes that react to target analytes in sweat, can perform quantitative analysis. To capture sweat, fluorometric sensing modalities were integrated into a skin-interfaced microfluidic system that was paired with a smartphone-based imaging module. This method yielded an accurate measurement of biomarkers in sweat.<\/p>\n In another recent study, researchers developed wearable sensors<\/a> to monitor biomolecule levels by combining continuous fluid sampling with in-situ analysis. Depending upon the target biomolecule, the particular assay was interchangeable.<\/p>\n The microfluidic device featured a droplet-flow method for timing, and a micropump to produce nanolitre-sized droplets. Biomarker variations within fluids, over time, yield insight into tissue physiology and may help to create personalized treatments.<\/p>\n The study\u2019s palm-sized sensor autonomously detected deviations from steady-state level.\u201cWe demonstrate how the sensor can track perturbed glucose and lactate levels in dermal tissue with results in close agreement with standard off-line analysis and consistent with changes in peripheral blood levels,\u201d the authors wrote.<\/p>\n Biomarker concentrations fluctuate continuously, as does chemical signalling. The capacity for continuous measurement of these dynamics has significant implications.<\/p>\n Many current point-of-care devices are single-measurement tools. The use of microfluidics for continuous monitoring has been strained where microfluidic systems rely upon bulky laboratory equipment such as syringe pumps and microscopes \u2014 impractical as wearable devices. But recent advances address this.<\/p>\n For example, the linear nature of microscale flow has required many external control devices. Another recent study, by an international research team<\/a>, highlights the design of networks with a nonlinear relation between flow rate and its applied pressure. This relation can be harnessed to switch the direction of internal flows by manipulating the input and output pressures.<\/p>\n Using rigid polymer channels to carry water, the investigators showed that these networks demonstrate a fluid version of Braess\u2019s Paradox: closing an intermediate channel resulted in a higher rather than lower, total flow rate. These findings are scalable and can implement flow routing with multiple switches. Practical applications can encompass built-in control mechanisms in microfluidic networks, furthering the creation of portable systems \u2014 such as wearable healthcare technologies<\/p>\n These new findings seem to have clear advantages, yet final shepherding of new findings toward commercialization remains the most challenging step. A new device can fail clinically, or it can run out of funding, miscalculate the market, or collide with regulations, according to Georgia Tech benchtop-to-bedside expert Tiffany Wilson<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cFind out about clinical workflow and how health care operates, then maybe decide not to pursue the prototype you had planned, but work on a new one instead,\u201d she warns. \u201cIt generally doesn\u2019t work to take what was built in the lab and make the same thing with medical-grade materials, and unfortunately, many researchers don\u2019t realize this until it\u2019s too late.\u201d<\/p>\n And, she notes, \u201cWords matter. For example, if I want to market my new catheter as \u2018pain-free,\u2019 the FDA may want me to conduct an expensive clinical trial, but if I take that same catheter and market it as \u2018low friction,\u2019 which is why it\u2019s pain-free, then I can demonstrate that with simple bench tests.\u201d<\/p>\n The variety of viewpoints should not be underestimated. \u201cMany stakeholders need their questions answered,\u201d Wilson said. The clinician is only a part of the equation. The hospital supply chain may not be able to handle it. Regulators may not approve it.<\/p>\n \u201cAlso, know your competition,\u201d Wilson advised. \u201cAre you more competitive than the current standard of care?\u201d<\/p>\n