Medical rigor on the consumer wrist

Medical rigor on the consumer wrist

Feature articles |
By eeNews Europe

Your average smartphone now has more processing power than the supercomputers used by NASA circa 1969 when it sent three astronauts to the moon. It is no surprise therefore that in recent years there has been surge of startups specifically developing peripheral devices to monitor details of one’s physical condition.


The rise of wearable devices can be attributed to a much larger societal disposition towards the Internet of Things (IoT). Although the IoT, as a concept, has been around for many years, it’s only recently started to gain traction. A maturing ecosystem of mobile operating systems such as Android and iOS, as well as an improving cloud computing infrastructure and the widespread availability of cheap wireless sensors means that OEMs in the consumer electronics sector have glimpsed the profitability of the medical technology sector and they want a piece of the pie.

The benefits of wearable and portable medical devices are clear. Wearable equipment makes patient data readily accessible and may reduce the number of times we need to visit a doctor and, in doing so alleviate the burden on our healthcare system. As well as this, it is becoming cheaper to produce wearable medical devices that fulfill the function traditionally limited to large and expensive medical devices in hospitals.

However, while wearable devices may have revolutionized the consumer electronics market, it doesn’t fit too well on the wrist of healthcare. Many industry experts are raising eyebrows at what they believe to be an incompatibility between the two sectors. 

It’s hard to argue the difference between the two sectors. In the age of globalization, consumer technology companies often go head-to-head in a price-based race to the bottom. While they may make higher returns financially, the product itself suffers from a greatly reduced product development life cycle (PDLC).

A typical consumer PDLC is 12 months. It can stretch to 24 months, or be as short as six. Compare this to the ten-year PDLC of your standard medical device and you can see why experts are worried.

More worrying is the lifespan of the battery in the device. With 40 years’ experience in designing and developing batteries at Accutronics, we have seen them get smaller in accordance with more compact device designs. This reduction in size unfortunately comes with a reduction in available energy, leading many wearable devices to suffer from inadequate run time. If your smartphone runs out of charge mid-conversation, it’s frustrating and inconvenient, but if your medical device runs out while monitoring your health, it can be life threatening.

The wearable revolution certainly has its place. You can’t argue with the consumer benefits and the ease of access it offers is definitely appealing in the medical industry. However, this accessibility comes with a performance trade-off. With a bespoke battery solution, you can maximize the potential of your portable device but even then wearables are still a long way from full professional integration.

Related links and articles:

News articles:

Combating compliance

Integrating safety and security into connected medical devices

Sensors for wearable electronics on 40% CAGR

Medical chip market on 12% CAGR

If you enjoyed this article, you will like the following ones: don't miss them by subscribing to :    eeNews on Google News


Linked Articles