At the end of class today, we got a chance to pull Ian aside. Ian had brought up some points about our microneedle device after design review 2, and we got him to give us some pointers on how to fabricate the allergen tips. For the most part, we've been considering our microneedles in terms of where they're going, into the dermis of the skin, and how the allergen is going to be delivered once they're there, either by hollow tubes, coated solid microneedles, or encapsulated tips. However, Ian raised a lot of red flag about what it actually takes to fabricate these microneedles. He is currently working on a senior project that works with microneedles and might even involve developing an applicator.
One problem he brought up was the flexing of the skin by a sort of bed-of-nails effect where the array sits on the skin, bending it slowly rather than puncturing quickly. We've talked about this before, and Ian wasn't even sure it would be a problem for our application. We should hash that out with real examples because his example of the Surgilance doesn't really fit our goals. Surgilance and Ian are both more interested in blood withdrawal rather than drug delivery.
Another problem he brought up is fabrication. Based on available industrial methods, some of the more complex tips might be a pipe dream. He suggested a printed sheet where needles are bent up. This image gets the idea across. It's not the ideal picture were were thinking of, but it might end up being the more reasonable route. It asks important questions about our product. Are we making something that anticipates future manufacturing methods, or do we want something that'll be ready to go our the door with available methods? The latter makes a lot more sense for this class and the lessons we've learned from it. We're not just making a feasible laboratory device; we need a marketable product that at least theoretically attract investors.
No comments:
Post a Comment