A portable, handheld electrospinning apparatus is designed and constructed using off-the-shelf components and 3D-printed parts. The portable electrospinner is used to generate nanofibers with diameters ranging from 85 to 600 nm; examination of these fibers is achieved with scanning electron microscopy. This portable electrospinner has similar capabilities to standard stationary benchtop electrospinners in terms of the diversity of polymers the device is able to spin into nanofibers and their resulting size and morphology. However, it provides much more ambulatory flexibility, employs current-limiting measures that allow for safer operation and is cost effective. As a demonstration of the device’s unique application space afforded by its portability, the device is applied in direct-to-skin electrospinning to improve the aesthetics of simulated hair loss in a mouse model by electrospinning dyed polyacrylonitrile nanofibers that mimic hair. The superficial nanofiber treatment for thinning hair is able to achieve an improvement in appearance similar to that of a commercially available powder product but outperforms the powder in the nanofiber’s superior adherence to the affected area. The portable electrospinning apparatus overcomes many limitations of immobile benchtop electrospinners and holds promise for applications in consumer end-use scenarios such as the treatment of alopecia via cosmetic hair thickening.

Introduction Upper-limb amputations make up 10% to 20% of the total amputations in the United States. Of the two million individuals currently living with limb loss, 30% to 50% do not wear their prosthesis regularly. This is a result of lack of education, lack of training, discomfort, poor cosmetics, and cost. Three-dimensional (3D) printing may provide a cost-effective alternative for upper-limb prostheses. The purpose of this pilot study was to test and compare efficiency and functional capabilities of a 3D-printed and commercially available manufactured myoelectric hand. Materials and Methods The research team designed a quasi-experimental, static group comparison trial. A box and blocks test was used to assess the efficiency of the i-limb and Limbitless Arm. The two prosthetic hands were tested over two visits with a 2-week crossover period. Two custom devices, to which the two hands attach distally, were created to accommodate the able-bodied subjects. Results Twenty-four able-bodied (mean age, 26.1 ± 4.2 yrs), healthy, right-hand–dominant participants were recruited for this study. There were 14 men and 10 women. The mean number of blocks using the Limbitless Arm was significantly lower than the i-limb. For trial 1, the mean was 8.4 ± 3.6 versus 12.9 ± 3.3 (P < 0.001). For trial 2, the mean was 8.3 ± 3.6 versus 13.8 ± 4.1 (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the mean number of blocks improved when using the i-limb versus the 3D-printed hand by 53.6% in trial 1 and 66.3% in trial 2. Similar findings were obtained when we ran the analyses separately for men (trial 1, the mean was 9.1 ± 3.3 vs. 12.9 ± 3.7, P = 0.01 and trial 2, the mean was 9.6 ± 3.2 vs. 14.1 ± 4.7, P = 0.02) and women (trial 1, the mean 7.5 ± 3.9 vs. 12.8 ± 2.9, P = 0.00 and trial 2, the mean 6.3 ± 3.4 vs. 13.4 ± 3.2, P = 0.00). Conclusions The results and observations made by the researchers suggested the i-limb was more efficient than the Limbitless Arm. There is a potential for 3D-printed prostheses to be a viable option for prosthetic care in the future with better development and technological advancements. However, at this point, myoelectric prostheses such as the i-limb are more practical and effective.