4.6 Article

The Role of Soft Robotic Micromachines in the Future of Medical Devices and Personalized Medicine

期刊

MICROMACHINES
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/mi13010028

关键词

soft robotics; biomaterials; medical devices; wearable technologies

资金

  1. Department of Bioengineering, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign
  2. National Science Foundation EFRI REM Program [1830896]
  3. Emerging Frontiers & Multidisciplinary Activities
  4. Directorate For Engineering [1830896] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Advancements in medical device design have led to the development of wearable technologies, minimally invasive surgical techniques, and patient-specific approaches to medicine. This review examines the progress of biomedical and engineering approaches to soft robotics in healthcare applications, focusing on the interface between biological and non-biological materials. From traditional robot design techniques to advancements in tunable material chemistry, the field offers opportunities for future healthcare solutions. A proposed extracellular matrix-based robotic actuator suggests that biomaterials and proteins may play a significant role in the future of medical device design.
Developments in medical device design result in advances in wearable technologies, minimally invasive surgical techniques, and patient-specific approaches to medicine. In this review, we analyze the trajectory of biomedical and engineering approaches to soft robotics for healthcare applications. We review current literature across spatial scales and biocompatibility, focusing on engineering done at the biotic-abiotic interface. From traditional techniques for robot design to advances in tunable material chemistry, we look broadly at the field for opportunities to advance healthcare solutions in the future. We present an extracellular matrix-based robotic actuator and propose how biomaterials and proteins may influence the future of medical device design.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据