Abstract
The high cost of quality prostheses, together with the lack of trained prosthetists, makes it challenging to obtain prosthetic devices in developing communities. Modern 3D digitising techniques and additive manufacturing (AM) technologies are gaining popularity in the bio-medical industry and, in the case of prosthesis production, reduce the need for a trained prosthetist. The objective of this research was to develop a new resource-efficient process chain for the manufacturing of prosthetic fingers using additive manufacturing technologies, and to compare it with the traditional (Sculptor) process chain. Fused deposition modelling (FDM), open-source FDM, 3-dimensional printing (3DP), and stereolithography (SLA) were evaluated in terms of their costs, time, material usage, and aesthetic quality. The surface qualities produced with the different additive manufacturing technologies were also compared. The results showed that 3DP was the preferred technology and was the best candidate for the production of prosthesis in terms of cost, quality, and time for developing communities. SLA produced the highest aesthetic quality prosthesis, but was the most expensive. It was concluded that using the additive manufacturing technology process chain to produce prosthetic fingers is faster and more cost effective than the traditional method.
Highlights
Since the industrial revolution, manufacturing has been regarded as the primary contributor to economic growth and development, as it stimulates the primary and tertiary sectors of the economy
According to Bartolo et al [2] an increasing number of prosthetics are required for developing communities that fall into the base of the pyramid (BoP) category
Examining the results obtained from the time, cost and material usage graphs, the open-source Fused deposition modelling (FDM) and the 3D printing (3DP) processes are in close contention for the most favourable additive manufacturing (AM) process
Summary
The high cost of quality prostheses, together with the lack of trained prosthetists, makes it challenging to obtain prosthetic devices in developing communities. The results showed that 3DP was the preferred technology and was the best candidate for the production of prosthesis in terms of cost, quality, and time for developing communities. It was concluded that using the additive manufacturing technology process chain to produce prosthetic fingers is faster and more cost effective than the traditional method. Die hoë kostes van gehalte prosteses, en die toegang tot opgeleide prostese vervaardigers, maak dit ’n uitdaging om prostetiese toestelle in ontwikkelende gemeenskappe te bekom. Moderne 3D digitaliserings tegnieke en toevoeging vervaardiging (AM) tegnologie is besig om in die bio-mediese bedryf gewild te raak en, in die geval van prostese produksie, kan dit die behoefte aan ’n opgeleide prostese vervaardigers beperk. Die resultate het getoon dat 3DP die voorkeur-tegnologie en die beste kandidaat vir die produksie van prostese in terme van koste, kwaliteit en tyd vir die ontwikkeling van gemeenskappe was. Die gebruik van AM tegnologie binne die waardeketting om prostetiese vingers te produseer, is vinniger en meer koste-effektiewe as die tradisionele metode
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
