Skin and Adhesives: Optimizing the Interface Between the Temporary Medical Device and the Patient

Event coverage of MD&M West 2011
Greater customization of the interface between the temporary medical device and the skin is needed, according to Avery Dennison.

Peter C. Johnson, vice president of research and development at Avery Dennison Medical (Chicago), will present “Skin and Adhesives: Optimizing the Interface Between the Temporary Medical Device and the Patient” on Tuesday, February 8, 2011. The session will occur at Innovation Briefs Theater 2 at noon.

MPMN: What problems or challenges exist with current device-patient interfaces?

Johnson:The interface between temporary medical devices (TMDs) and the skin is often mediated by adhesives. Because of the broad variability of human skin, TMD adhesives can either prove to be too weak or too strong. In the former instance, the TMD can prematurely detach from the skin. This can lead to exposure of wounds, loss of monitoring function, and dislodgement or unwanted motion of catheter devices. In the latter instance, tenacious adhesion of the TMD to the skin can lead to painful removal or even injury to the skin. New approaches demand greater customization of the TMD-skin adhesive interface.

MPMN: In what ways can medical device manufacturers optimize the interface between the device and the patient?

Johnson: The TMD-skin interface can be optimized by designing adhesives that are better suited for specific skin types. For example, fragile skin in the elderly requires different adhesives than the sturdy skin of youth. An approach that will allow stronger adhesives to be used in all cases is the ability to reverse adhesive strength, enabling low-trauma removal.

MPMN: How can optimizing this TMD interface enhance patient care or benefit the clinician?

Johnson: Optimizing the TMD-skin interface can benefit the clinician primarily by ensuring patient compliance with TMD use. The clinician knows that when a TMD is held reliably in place, risk can be reduced for premature tissue exposure when wounds are being treated; when monitoring and therapy for glucose sensors and pumps fails; and during catheter-based sepsis when IV catheter–securement devices are used. Proper TMD securement can also ensure that the course of treatment designed by the clinician is followed. Successful completion of the care plan can contribute to an improved outcome for the patient.

MPMN: What does the future hold for wound care and temporary device adhesives?

Johnson: The evolution of the TMD-wound interface will be driven by the ability to design adhesives that are less traumatic to peri wound skin, deliver therapies directly to the wound, and employ novel methods to analyze the state of the wound at any time for more individualized therapy.

MPMN: What do you hope attendees
will learn from your presentation?

Johnson: I would like my Innovation Briefs presentation to provide attendees with an overview of the TMD-skin interface and the opportunity it presents to us to address the current and future needs of both patients and clinicians. Also, I want to build a broader awareness of how Avery Dennison Medical’s innovations can help meet the unmet needs in this market.