Design Decisions Matrix for Stick-to-Skin Devices
Optimize your stick-to-skin device design based on your specific application requirements with our comprehensive selection guide.
Adhesive Type |
Skin Compatibility |
Adhesion Strength |
Removal Ease |
Cost |
Best Applications |
Limitations |
Silicone-Based |
EXCELLENT Hypoallergenic, gentle removal |
GOOD Moderate-strong adhesion |
EXCELLENT Pain-free removal |
HIGH $$$ |
Extended wear devices, sensitive skin, pediatric/geriatric | Higher cost, potential for edge lifting in high-moisture environments |
Acrylic-Based |
GOOD Generally well-tolerated |
EXCELLENT Very strong adhesion |
FAIR May require adhesive remover |
LOW $ |
Active patients, short-term wear, high-stress applications | Potential irritation, aggressive removal, sensitization risk |
Hydrocolloid |
EXCELLENT Breathable, moisture-managing |
GOOD Swells with moisture |
GOOD Gentle, self-releasing |
MEDIUM $$ |
Wound care, high-exudate applications, extended wear | Limited electronic integration, thickness, moisture-dependent performance |
Wear Duration |
Recommended Adhesive |
Backing Material |
Key Design Considerations |
Typical Applications |
Regulatory Focus |
Hours (1 - 24) |
Acrylic or Medical-grade pressure-sensitive |
Polyurethane film, Non-woven fabric |
Easy application, cost optimization, immediate adhesion |
Surgical monitoring, procedure-specific patches, diagnostic tests |
510(k) Simplified, Basic Biocompatibility |
Days (1 - 7) |
Silicone or Modified acrylic |
Breathable polyurethane, MVTR-optimized films |
Moisture management, edge integrity, comfort optimization |
Continuous glucose monitoring, cardiac patches, wound dressings |
510(k) Standard, Extended Contact Testing |
Days (7 - 30) |
Advanced silicone systems |
Multi-layer constructions, reinforced edges |
Long-term biocompatibility, skin health maintenance, secure attachment |
Implantable sensor interfaces, chronic monitoring systems |
PMA Pathway, Chronic Contact Studies |
Activity Level |
Mechanical Stress |
Adhesive Requirements |
Design Features |
Testing Requirements |
Cost Impact |
Sedentary (Limited Mobility) |
LOW Minimal stretching/movement |
Standard adhesion strength, comfort-focused |
Thin profile, breathable materials, easy application |
Basic peel testing, skin irritation assessment |
LOW $ |
Active (Daily Activities) |
MEDIUM Regular movement, some sweating |
Enhanced adhesion, moisture resistance |
Flexible backing, sweat-proof edges, reinforced attachment |
Dynamic peel testing, moisture exposure, wear simulation |
MEDIUM $$ |
Sports/Athletic (High Intensity) |
HIGH Extreme stretching, heavy perspiration |
Maximum adhesion strength, waterproof performance |
Ultra-flexible materials, advanced edge sealing, impact resistance |
Extreme condition testing, sports-specific validation, durability studies |
HIGH $$$ |
Population |
Skin Characteristics |
Design Priorities |
Material Considerations |
Regulatory Requirements |
Special Testing |
Pediatric (0 - 17 years) |
Thinner, more sensitive, rapid growth |
Gentle adhesion, colorful/fun design, parent-friendly application |
Hypoallergenic silicones, latex-free, smaller sizes |
Pediatric Study Plan, Age-specific labeling |
Pediatric skin model testing, age-appropriate usability studies |
Adult (18 - 64 years) |
Normal thickness, variable sensitivity, active lifestyle |
Performance optimization, lifestyle integration, cost-effectiveness |
Standard medical-grade adhesives, versatile backing materials |
Standard 510(k), CE Mark |
Standard biocompatibility panel, real-world use validation |
Geriatric (65+ years) |
Fragile, thin, slower healing, medications affect skin |
Minimal trauma removal, high visibility design, caregiver-friendly |
Ultra-gentle silicones, fragile skin-specific formulations |
Elderly-specific studies, Medication interaction assessment |
Fragile skin testing, medication interaction studies, caregiver usability |
Cost Component |
Low-Cost Option |
Mid-Range Option |
Premium Option |
Performance Trade-Offs |
Volume Considerations |
Adhesive Materials |
Basic acrylic $0.10-0.25/unit |
Modified acrylic/Silicone blend $0.25-0.60/unit |
Advanced silicone systems $0.60-1.50/unit |
Skin compatibility vs. adhesion strength vs. removal gentleness |
Economies at 100K+ units/year |
Backing Materials |
Standard PU film $0.05-0.15/unit |
Breathable films/Non-wovens $0.15-0.35/unit |
Multi-layer engineered films $0.35-0.80/unit |
Comfort vs. moisture management vs. durability vs. flexibility |
Custom materials require 500K+ units |
Manufacturing Complexity |
Simple die-cut patches $0.20-0.40/unit |
Multi-layer lamination $0.40-0.80/unit |
Electronics integration $2.00-10.00/unit |
Functionality vs. complexity vs. quality control requirements |
Automation viable at 1M+ units/year |
Regulatory / Testing |
Basic biocompatibility $50-100K total |
Extended testing panel $100-250K total |
Clinical studies required $250K-1M+ total |
Time to market vs. regulatory risk vs. clinical evidence strength |
One-time cost spread over product lifetime |
Assumptions & METHODOLOGY
This design decision matrix provides comprehensive guidance for stick-to-skin medical device development based on industry standards, clinical requirements, and manufacturing benchmarks as of 2024. Recommendations synthesize data from adhesive manufacturers, contract manufacturing partners, regulatory submissions, and real-world clinical applications across multiple device categories. Adhesive Performance Parameters: Adhesive classifications (silicone-based, acrylic-based, hydrocolloid) reflect medical-grade materials meeting ISO 10993 biocompatibility standards. Performance ratings (Excellent/Good/Fair) are derived from comparative testing data including peel strength (ASTM D3330), shear adhesion resistance, and skin reaction studies. Cost ranges ($0.10-1.50/unit) assume 25cm² device footprint with medical-grade certification and represent volume pricing at 100,000 units annually. Wear Duration Specifications: Duration categories (Hours: 1-24, Days: 1-7, Days: 7-30) align with FDA contact duration classifications and typical clinical applications. Adhesive recommendations and backing material specifications are based on moisture vapor transmission rate (MVTR) requirements ranging from 500-1200 g/m²/24hr. Regulatory pathway guidance reflects current FDA 510(k) and PMA requirements with associated biocompatibility testing per ISO 10993 standards. Activity Level Assessments: Mechanical stress categories (Low/Medium/High) incorporate data from accelerometer studies and sweat exposure testing. Design features and testing requirements scale with anticipated patient activity, from sedentary post-surgical recovery through high-intensity athletic applications. Cost impacts reflect additional material and testing requirements for enhanced durability. Population-Specific Adaptations: Age-based categories account for dermatological differences in skin thickness, healing rates, and sensitivity. Pediatric specifications include 25-30% adhesion reduction for gentle removal, while geriatric considerations incorporate fragile skin protocols and medication interaction factors. Regulatory requirements reflect FDA guidance for age-specific labeling and testing protocols. Cost Structure Modeling: Component costs represent 2024 market pricing from qualified medical device suppliers in North America and Europe. Manufacturing complexity tiers assume ISO 13485-certified facilities with appropriate clean room classifications. Volume considerations incorporate equipment amortization schedules and economies of scale achievable at different production levels. Regulatory and testing costs reflect typical expenditures for US market entry, excluding clinical study variability based on specific indications. All specifications represent industry benchmarks and typical ranges. Actual performance, costs, and requirements will vary based on specific device design, intended use population, manufacturing location, supplier relationships, and regulatory strategy. Recommendations should be validated through application-specific testing and consultation with qualified suppliers and regulatory professionals.