Prosthetic technology continues to advance, yet conventional devices often lack the responsiveness and sensory feedback necessary for natural movement. Smart materials offer transformative solutions by bridging artificial systems with biological function. Shape memory alloys enable adaptive actuation by altering stiffness and position; piezoelectric materials convert mechanical stimuli into electrical signals, enhancing sensory feedback; nanostructured composites improve strength, flexibility, and osseointegration; and soft, biointegrative polymers provide comfort and conformability. Integrated with AI-driven neural interfaces, these materials enhance user control, proprioception, and overall comfort. However, challenges remain in manufacturing complexity, material durability, and cost accessibility. Emerging approaches such as modular fabrication, self-healing composites, and intelligent feedback systems show promise in addressing these barriers. As smart materials reshape prosthetic design, they open opportunities for more intuitive, durable, and affordable solutions. This review examines recent advancements, applications, and ongoing challenges, highlighting the critical role of interdisciplinary collaboration in transforming mobility and quality of life for individuals with limb loss.

Introduction

Limb loss presents significant physical and psychological challenges, affecting mobility, independence, and quality of life (1-2). Prosthetic devices play a major role in restoring functionality and enabling individuals to regain autonomy (1,3). Over the years, prosthetic technology has evolved beyond traditional mechanical solutions, integrating improvements in comfort, adaptability, and user experience (1-3). However, conventional prosthetics still face key limitations, particularly in responsiveness and sensory feedback required for a natural user experience (1,3-4).

In response, smart materials offer transformative solutions that bridge artificial and biological systems (4-6). Smart materials—such as shape memory alloys, piezoelectric materials, and nanocomposites—exhibit dynamic properties, responding to stimuli like pressure, temperature, or electric fields. Unlike traditional materials that passively endure forces, smart materials sense, react, and adapt in real time, modifying properties such as shape, stiffness, and conductivity (5-8). This responsiveness enables them to interact naturally with users and their surroundings (8-11).

By leveraging these capabilities, smart materials allow prosthetic limbs to adapt fluidly to user movements, provide real-time sensory feedback, and improve durability and comfort (5,7-10). Biomimetic tactile sensors and electronic skin interfaces enable more natural motion and enhanced environmental interaction (8-10,12-13). Advances in neural interface technologies further improve communication between prosthetics and the nervous system, offering precise control (11,14-16).

The evolution of prosthetics reflects a shift from rigid devices to bio-integrated systems mimicking natural movement and sensation (2-3,6,17). Early designs relied on wood and metal, offering limited adaptability (1-2). Modern prostheses use flexible composites and advanced control mechanisms, while smart materials enhance sensory feedback and responsiveness (3-4,6,8,17).

Industry 4.0—defined by automation, data exchange, and intelligent control systems—has accelerated innovation (2-3,18). AI-driven feedback, neural interfaces, and additive manufacturing now enable highly personalized and adaptable prosthetics (3,18,15). Nanostructured materials and adaptive polymers improve durability and comfort, while reducing costs and increasing accessibility (6,16-18).

This review explores how smart materials enhance prosthetic interfaces through improved adaptability, sensory feedback, and comfort (3-6). By examining their integration with biological systems, this paper highlights their potential to redefine prosthetic technology and improve rehabilitation outcomes, while addressing challenges in material integration, accessibility, and cost (3,6,16,18).

Smart Materials Available

Shape Memory Alloys

Shape memory alloys (SMAs) have emerged as transformative materials in prosthetic development due to their unique ability to return to a preset shape when exposed to heat or electrical current, enabling adaptive and biomimetic motion (5-7,18). Unlike traditional materials, SMAs can sense and respond to environmental stimuli, dynamically adjusting their properties in real time (1,6,18). This enables prosthetic limbs to offer greater flexibility, stability, and responsiveness, reducing the need for manual adjustments and better replicating natural musculoskeletal behavior (1,5,7,18).

Chandra et al. demonstrated how SMAs integrated into bioadaptive prosthetic joints allow dynamic stiffness modulation based on user activity and external conditions (5). These actuators reduce energy demands and motor reliance while improving system longevity (5,7). The stress-strain relationship governing SMA actuation, expressed in as (Equation 1), directly impacts force generation during phase transformations, linking material behavior to biomechanical output (5-7). Park et al. expanded this application in wearable robotics, showing SMA-based fabric muscles enabling lifelike and adaptive motion in soft exosuits and prostheses (19). Similarly, Yang et al. validated SMAs' ability to deliver complex movements in a lightweight, 19-DOF prosthetic hand, emphasizing the importance of compact, responsive actuators for dexterous tasks (16).

Despite these advantages, SMA actuation speed remains slower than piezoelectric or motorized systems due to reliance on heat transfer (5-7,19). Their hysteresis and nonlinear behavior complicate control strategies, often requiring advanced algorithms for smooth and predictable movement (5,7,20). Fatigue and limited cycle life under repetitive use also pose durability concerns, though research into hybrid alloys and microstructured composites is addressing these issues (5-7,18-19). Tanriverdi et al. highlight how adaptive soft metamaterials are beginning to bridge these gaps, improving both real-time responsiveness and material resilience for wearable human–machine interfaces (21).

Piezoelectric Materials

Piezoelectric materials play a pivotal role in enhancing sensory feedback in prosthetics by converting mechanical stress into electrical signals, creating a bidirectional communication pathway between the user and the environment (5-6,18,22). This capability enables real-time interaction through electronic skin and pressure sensors, providing amputees with the ability to perceive touch, pressure, and subtle movement (16,18,22). These sensors contribute to proprioception by generating electrical responses proportional to mechanical deformation, forming the basis for feedback-driven control mechanisms (16,22).

Recent innovations focus on integrating piezoelectric nanogenerators into prosthetic limbs to harvest mechanical energy and create self-powered systems that bypass the need for external batteries (18,22,23). Suo et al. demonstrated that such systems can supply continuous feedback while maintaining lightweight form factors optimal for daily use (22). Moreover, flexible piezoelectric films are increasingly used to replicate skin-like sensitivity, enabling seamless embedding into soft prosthetic surfaces (18, 24-25). These films respond proportionally to applied stress, a relationship governed by Equation 2, where mechanical stress (σ) induces electric displacement (D), crucial for precise signal generation during limb movement and interaction.

Advanced research by Santos et al. and Guo et al. has yielded high-resolution tactile arrays capable of mapping localized pressure, improving object texture recognition and grip force modulation (16,18,23). Furthermore, hybrid interfaces combining piezoelectric materials with biomaterials enable enhanced neural transmission, bridging sensory gaps between prosthetic limbs and the user’s nervous system (16,25). Despite these advances, limitations remain. Piezoelectric elements face challenges in sensitivity tuning and integration complexity, particularly when embedded across large prosthetic surfaces without degrading signal resolution or durability (18,22). Nevertheless, emerging developments in multiplexed electronic skin and dynamic sensing arrays continue to push these materials toward creating lifelike, responsive prosthetic interfaces (18,23,24).

Nanostructured Composites for Strengths and Adaptability

Nanostructured composites offer a critical balance of strength, flexibility, and low weight, making them essential for advancing the biomechanical performance of prosthetic limbs (7-8, 21). These materials enhance durability while maintaining adaptability, allowing devices to endure daily mechanical stresses and conform to the natural dynamics of human movement (7-8). Babizhayev highlights the potential of self-healing nanocomposites, which can autonomously repair microfractures, extending prosthetic lifespan and reducing maintenance costs (8,21).

Gul et al. developed bioinspired nanostructured interfaces for stretchable electronics that actively improve material-tissue interaction and mechanical durability, supporting long-term prosthetic stability and integration (13). Hydroxyapatite-enhanced nanostructures particularly improve osseointegration by strengthening the bone-implant interface and decreasing implant failure rates (21). Meanwhile, carbon nanotube-based composites contribute conductive pathways essential for integrating neural control and sensory feedback mechanisms (8,25).

The mechanical properties of nanostructured composites often follow the Rule of Mixtures as described by Equation 3, where the composite modulus (Ec) depends on the volume fractions (Vf , Vm) and moduli (Ef , Em) of fiber and matrix phases, optimizing both stiffness and compliance (7-8).

Nonetheless, despite these benefits, challenges regarding manufacturing complexity, cost scalability, and long-term environmental stability under biological conditions (8,21). Ongoing advancements in functionalized nanomaterials and dynamic self-healing systems aim to overcome these limitations, paving the way for more resilient, lightweight, and bioadaptive prosthetic designs (7,21).

Neural Interface Technologies and Smart Materials

The integration of neural interface technologies with smart materials has become essential to advancing prosthetic control and user experience. By establishing direct communication pathways between devices and the nervous system, neural interfaces enable intuitive and responsive control of artificial limbs (2,16,26). Li et al. started the use of electronic skin embedded with piezoelectric and flexible nanomaterial sensors to capture environmental feedback and user movement, providing real-time adjustments during prosthetic operation (11,22). Building on this, Zou et al. and Guo et al. developed biomimetic tactile sensors that mimic human skin’s sensitivity, allowing users to engage naturally with their surroundings through restored tactile perception (12,16,18). These smart interfaces elevate prosthetic functionality, helping users regain natural control over artificial limbs (16,18).

Furthermore, electrode-based neural interfaces enhance signal fidelity between prosthetic devices and the peripheral nervous system, reducing latency and improving motor control precision (16,26). Ivani et al. demonstrated how high-density neural electrodes reduce lag between user intent and device action, significantly improving fine motor skills (26,27). Complementing this, studies on neuromorphic computing show AI-driven systems can dynamically learn from user behaviors, enhancing motion accuracy and sensory adaptation with prolonged use. These systems analyze patterns in movement and feedback to adjust control strategies in real time, reducing delays and improving responsiveness. Over time, AI continuously refines its predictions and responses, allowing prosthetics to feel more intuitive and aligned with the user’s natural motion and intent. (23,28).

Figure 1: Integration of Smart Materials in a Prosthetic Leg. Diagram illustrating how neural interfaces, shape memory alloys, nanostructured composites, and piezoelectric materials contribute to the functionality of a modern prosthetic leg. Neural interfaces enable direct user control, shape memory alloys provide adaptive joint actuation, nanostructured composites offer lightweight structural support, and piezoelectric materials deliver sensory feedback for enhanced environmental interaction.

Applications and Integration of Smart Materials in Prosthetics

Sensory Enhancement and Feedback Mechanisms

Smart materials play a crucial role in enhancing sensory feedback, enabling prosthetic users to engage more naturally and intuitively with their environment. Piezoelectric sensors and electronic skin interfaces have transformed prosthetic functionality by detecting pressure, temperature, and texture changes, closely mimicking the sensory functions of biological skin (11,12,28). Biomimetic tactile sensors, often made from flexible nanomaterials, further enhance proprioception by transmitting real-time feedback, which improves control, grip stability, and movement precision (13,16,28).

A prominent demonstration of these advancements was seen during the Cybathlon 2020 competition, where a prosthetic hand equipped with enhanced sensory systems allowed users to complete complex dexterity tasks more efficiently than traditional designs (4,20,29). Participants using smart-material-based prosthetics were able to perform daily activities (Figure 2), such as picking up small objects, tying shoelaces, and pouring liquids, with greater speed and accuracy—activities that demand fine motor control and responsive tactile feedback (29-30).

Moreover, studies by Kim et al. and others have shown that integrating biomimetic sensors with AI-driven feedback systems dynamically enhances performance (20,31). These smart prosthetics automatically adjust grip strength and hand positioning in real time, reducing cognitive load and improving task accuracy (31). Furthermore, multiplexed electronic skin technologies and hybrid sensor networks now enable precise tactile mapping and haptic feedback transmission, elevating user experience and dexterity even further (28,32).

Figure 2: Comparison of prosthetic performance in Cybathlon 2020, highlighting the differences in task completion time and accuracy between traditional prosthetic users and smart prosthetic users.

Adaptice Control and Biomechanical Integration

Beyond sensory feedback, smart materials also play a vital role in adaptive control and biomechanical integration in prosthetic devices. Shape memory alloys (SMAs) and electroactive polymers enable prosthetics to respond dynamically to user movement and environmental stimuli, providing smoother, more natural motion (19, 24). As discussed earlier, AI-driven feedback systems enhance this control by learning user movement patterns and adjusting performance over time to optimize responsiveness (21, 27).

Neural-controlled prosthetics, supported by bio-integrated smart sensors, have further expanded possibilities for restoring natural motor control as with the Vibro-Inertial Bionic Enhancement Systems (VIBES). It incorporates embedded sensors and haptic feedback to improve proprioception without relying on vision (20). Clinical testing in upper-limb prosthetic users revealed improved coordination, faster reaction times, and greater confidence during fine motor tasks (20, 28).

Additionally, Zhang et al. demonstrated that adaptive smart systems integrated with neural interfaces reduce user fatigue and improve task efficiency during extended use (21). Complementing these advances, electroactive polymers help synchronize prosthetic movement with neural and muscular signals, enhancing biomechanical realism and seamless user interaction (22, 23).

While these technologies show transformative potential, ongoing challenges—such as system durability, long-term user comfort, and scalability—remain. These will be critical areas to address in advancing toward broader clinical adoption.

Challenges in the Integration of Smart Materials

Manufacturing Complexities and Material Limitations

Despite the substantial benefits offered by smart materials in prosthetic devices, critical challenges remain—particularly in manufacturing scalability, durability, and production efficiency. Materials such as shape memory alloys, piezoelectric elements, and nanostructured composites provide superior adaptability and feedback, yet their fabrication processes require specialized techniques that increase complexity and hinder widespread adoption (3, 5, 19).

For example, Zhou et al. reported that advanced piezoelectric electronic skin systems require precise sensor embedding and alignment to ensure reliable signal transmission during prosthetic use, adding to integration challenges (28). Likewise, Chandra et al. showed that shape memory alloys demand tightly controlled thermal or electrical activation to maintain consistent performance, which complicates design and operation (3, 19).

Durability further complicates adoption, as repeated mechanical stress and environmental exposure gradually degrade material performance (8, 20). To address these concerns, Gul et al. developed bioinspired nanostructured interfaces designed for stretchable electronics that improve mechanical resilience and support tissue interaction, offering potential pathways toward more robust prosthetic systems (29). However, while these solutions show promise, large-scale implementation and long-term stability in clinical environments have yet to be fully realized.

Cost and Accessibility Concerns

Due to the novelty and complexity of smart material integration, cost remains a major barrier to widespread accessibility. Advanced materials and embedded electronics significantly increase production expenses, often making devices unaffordable for many individuals (3, 5-6, 19). Traditional prosthetics are already costly, with customized bionic limbs priced in the tens of thousands of dollars; incorporating smart materials further escalates costs (6, 19).

Zhang et al. demonstrated that cost-effective fabrication strategies—such as 3D printing and modular component design—help reduce production costs while preserving high performance (21, 30). Likewise, open-source prosthetic technologies, supported by collaborations between public health organizations and private companies, offer pathways to broaden financial accessibility (26, 31).

Carter and Wilson described how AI-enhanced sensory mapping uses machine learning to optimize prosthetic control (19, 27). Omar and Hassan showed that 3D bioprinting produces customized, flexible prosthetic interfaces that improve comfort and streamline manufacturing (26, 31). Building on this, Raschke et al. and Yang et al. emphasized how cloud-based AI systems and robotic-assisted fabrication enable real-time prosthetic adjustments and scalable, lower-cost production (4, 30, 32). These approaches may ultimately help bridge the affordability gap and expand access to advanced prosthetic technologies.

Future Directions in Smart Prosthetic Development

The next generation of prosthetic technology is being shaped by advancements in nanomaterials and bio-integrative designs, which improve both structural performance and user adaptability (8, 29, 30). Innovations such as self-healing nanocomposites and biomimetic coatings aim to increase prosthetic durability and enhance long-term biocompatibility (8, 29). Additionally, integrating artificial intelligence with smart prosthetic systems enables real-time learning and adaptive control, allowing prosthetics to anticipate and respond to user needs (19, 27, 30). AI-driven neural networks, combined with machine learning algorithms, refine movement precision, optimize sensory feedback, and improve overall user experience (19, 27, 31).

The continued evolution of smart prosthetic systems depends on interdisciplinary collaboration across material science, biomedical engineering, and clinical research (28, 29, 32). Advances in neural-prosthetic interfaces hold the potential to revolutionize control strategies by establishing direct communication between the nervous system and artificial limbs (16, 26, 31). By enhancing electrode-based sensory feedback and integrating AI-assisted motor control, researchers aim to develop intuitive and fully responsive prosthetic systems (16, 19, 30). For example, Dong et al. demonstrated the use of electrochemically actuated microelectrodes to improve neural communication pathways in prosthetics, while Yang et al. highlighted a lightweight prosthetic hand with human-level dexterity and feedback capabilities (30, 32).

Furthermore, clinical trials and patient-centered research remain essential to refining prosthetic functionality and ensuring laboratory innovations translate into real-world use. Cross-disciplinary partnerships continue to be crucial in overcoming existing limitations and making high-tech prosthetics more accessible, affordable, and effective for broader populations (26, 28, 32).

Conclusion

Smart materials have transformed prosthetic technology by enhancing adaptability, sensory feedback, and durability. Shape memory alloys enable dynamic movement, piezoelectric materials provide real-time feedback, and nanostructured composites improve strength and longevity. Neural-controlled prosthetics and sensory-enhanced limbs demonstrate the potential of these innovations in improving motor function and proprioception. However, challenges such as complex manufacturing, material degradation, and high costs limit widespread adoption. The precise fabrication of biomechanically integrated smart materials remains a hurdle, requiring advanced engineering techniques to ensure durability and efficiency. Additionally, accessibility remains a concern, as high production costs make cutting-edge prosthetics financially out of reach for many users. Future research should focus on self-healing materials, cost-effective 3D printing, and AI-driven neural integration to refine control mechanisms. Expanding interdisciplinary collaboration between material science, bioengineering, and AI technology will accelerate advancements in smart prosthetics, ensuring they are more intuitive and user-responsive. Clinical trials assessing long-term biocompatibility, user comfort, and performance in real-world conditions are essential. Additionally, hybrid materials that integrate multiple smart properties could further improve prosthetic efficiency and multifunctionality.

Author Contributions: Writing and Visualization, J.R.; Supervision, N.I., A.W., and E.P. J.R. conducted the literature review, developed figures and visualizations, synthesized the data, and drafted and revised the manuscript. N.I., A.W., and E.P. provided supervision, guidance, and critical feedback throughout the development of the review.

Funding: Tufts University Financial Aid Grant and the Center for STEM Diversity funds the author’s continued attendance at Tufts University School of Engineering.

Acknowledgments: The author gratefully acknowledges biomedical engineering peers Amanda Lee (E’26), Marco Byrnes (E’26), Grace Costello (E’26), and Madison Page (E’27) of Tufts University for their valuable peer review and proofreading. Appreciation is also extended to external reviewers Mariah Gordon (Psychology Student, Arkansas Tech University), Joshua Fleegler (E’26, Tufts University), and Mark Martirosian (A’26, Tufts University) for their thoughtful proofreading and suggestions. Special thanks are owed to Nisha Iyer, Ph.D., and Ph.D. candidates Emily Pallack (EG’2G) and Alexis Walker (EG’2G) for their supervision and insightful guidance.

Conflicts of Interest: The author declares that the research was conducted in absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be considered as a potential conflict of interest.

References

Guilherme H. Elçadi. Advancements and Challenges in Prosthetic Devices: Exploring Materials, Integration, and Future Directions. J. Disabil. Res. 2023; 2(1):i-i. doi:10.57197/JDR-2023-0007.
Raschke SU. Limb prostheses: Industry 1.0 to 4.0: Perspectives on technological advances in prosthetic care. Front. Rehabil. Sci. 2022;3:854404. doi:10.3389/fresc.2022.854404.
Caserta G, Boccardo N, Freddolini M, et al. Benefits of the Cybathlon 2020 experience for a prosthetic hand user: a case study on the Hannes system. J. NeuroEngineering Rehabil. 2022;19:68. doi:10.1186/s12984-022-01046-y.
Tam S, Boukadoum M, Campeau-Lecours A, et al. Intuitive real-time control strategy for high-density myoelectric hand prosthesis using deep and transfer learning. Sci. Rep. 2021;11:11275. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-90688-4.
Chandra A, Daniels B, Curti M, Tiels K, Lomonova EA, Tartakovsky DM. Discovery of sparse hysteresis models for piezoelectric materials. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2023;122(21). doi:10.1063/5.0146134.
Karim MR, Siddiqui MIH, Assaifan AK, et al. Nanotechnology and prosthetic devices: Integrating biomedicine and materials science for enhanced performance and adaptability. J. Disabil. Res. 2024;3(3). doi:10.57197/JDR-2024-0019.
Zaman S, Leyva A, Hassan MS, Valladolid A, Herrera NE, Gomez SG, Mahmud MS, Tucker D, Haynes C, Lin Y. Implementation of smart materials for actuation of traditional valve technology for hybrid energy systems. Actuators2023;12:131. doi:10.3390/act12030131.
Nicoletti J. Enhanced piezoelectricity in sustainable-by-design chitosan nanocomposite elastomers for prosthetics, robotics, and circular electronics. arXiv 2024; arXiv:2407.18585. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2407.18585.
Zou Z, Zhu C, Li Y, Lei X, Zhang W, Xiao J. Fully recyclable and malleable electronic skin enabled by dynamic covalent thermoset nanocomposite. Sci. Adv. 2018;4(2):eaaq0508. doi:10.1126/sciadv.aaq0508.
Liu F, Deswal S, Christou A, Shojaei Baghini M, Chirila R, Liu H, Liu W. Synaptic transistor-based electronic skin for robots to feel and learn. Sci. Robot. 2022;7(63):eabq2521. doi:10.1126/scirobotics.abq2521.
Oh JY, Rondeau-Gagné S, Chiu YC, Chortos A, Lissel F, Wang GJN. Intrinsically stretchable and healable semiconducting polymer for organic transistors. Nature 2016;539(7629):411-415. doi:10.1038/nature20102.
Zhou J, Li J, Jia H, et al. Mormyroidea-inspired electronic skin for active non-contact three-dimensional tracking and sensing. Nat. Commun. 2024;15:9875. doi:10.1038/s41467-024-54249-3.
Gul O, Song M, Gu CY, et al. Bioinspired interfacial engineering for highly stretchable electronics. Nat. Commun.2025;16:1337. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-56502-9.
Suo J, Liu Y, Cheng C, Wang K, Chen M, Chan HY. Flexible sponge-sensor array for muscle activities detection and human limb motion recognition. arXiv 2022; arXiv:2205.03238. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2205.03238.
Dong C, Carnicer-Lombarte A, Bonafè F, et al. Electrochemically actuated microelectrodes for minimally invasive peripheral nerve interfaces. Nat. Mater. 2024;23:969-976. doi:10.1038/s41563-024-01886-0.
Yang H, Tao Z, Yang J, et al. A lightweight prosthetic hand with 19-DOF dexterity and human-level functions. Nat. Commun. 2025;16:955. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-56352-5.
Andersen MS, Damsgaard M, Rasmussen J. Do kinematic models reduce the effects of soft tissue artefacts in skin marker-based motion analysis? An in vivo study of knee kinematics. J. Biomech. 2010;43(2):285-290. doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.08.034.
Park M, Park YJ, Chen X, Park YK, Kim MS, Ahn JH. MoS₂-based tactile sensor for electronic skin applications. Adv. Mater. 2016;28(13):2556-2562. doi:10.1002/adma.201504346.
Park SJ, Park CH. Suit-type wearable robot powered by shape-memory-alloy-based fabric muscle. Sci. Rep. 2019;9:9157. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-45722-x.
Ivani AS, Barontini F, Catalano MG, Grioli G, Bianchi M, Bicchi A. VIBES: Vibro-Inertial Bionic Enhancement System in a prosthetic socket. In: Proc. 2023 Int. Conf. Rehabil. Robot. (ICORR); 2023; Singapore. p. 1-6. doi:10.1109/ICORR58425.2023.10304768.
Tanriverdi U, Senesi G, Asfour T, et al. Dynamically adaptive soft metamaterial for wearable human–machine interfaces. Nat. Commun. 2025;16:2621. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-57634-8.
Loverich JJ, Kanno I, Kotera H. A new class of all-polymer micropumps. Lab Chip 2023;23(5):945-953. doi:10.1039/D2LC00987A.
Chen B, Feng Y, Wang Q. Combining vibrotactile feedback with volitional myoelectric control for robotic transtibial prostheses. Front. Neurorobot. 2016;10:8. doi:10.3389/fnbot.2016.00008.
Kim J, Lee M, Shim HJ, Ghaffari R, Cho HR, Son D. Stretchable silicon nanoribbon electronics for skin prosthesis. Nat. Commun. 2014;5:5747. doi:10.1038/ncomms6747.
Guo H, Lan C, Zhou Z, Sun P, Wei D. Flexible and stretchable WS₂-based humidity sensors for electronic skin. Nanoscale 2017;9(20):6246-6253. doi:10.1039/C7NR01016H.
Kang K, Ye S, Jeong C, et al. Bionic artificial skin with a fully implantable wireless tactile sensory system for wound healing and restoring skin tactile function. Nat. Commun. 2024;15:10. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-44064-7.
Li Y, Cao Z, Li T, Sun F, Bai Y, Lu Q, Wang S, Yang X, Hao M, Lan N, Zhang T. Highly selective biomimetic flexible tactile sensor for neuroprosthetics. Research 2020;2020:8910692. doi:10.34133/2020/8910692.
Esponda M, Howard TM. Grasp control through multi-modal interactions for assistive prosthetic devices. arXiv 2018; arXiv:1810.07899. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1810.07899.
Omar AM, Hassan M. Design of 3D printed smart material compatible hand prosthesis. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev.2023;60(4):789-802. doi:10.1682/JRRD.2023.04.0078.
Pelrine R, Kornbluh R, Pei Q, Joseph J. Electrically actuated elastomers with strain greater than 100%. Science2000;287(5454):836-839. doi:10.1126/science.287.5454.836.
Burnett JK, Choi YT, Li H, Wereley NM, Miller RH, Shim JK. Vibration suppression of a composite prosthetic foot using piezoelectric shunt damping: Implications to vibration-induced cumulative trauma. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.2021;68(9):2741-2751. doi:10.1109/TBME.2021.3053374.
Awais M, AliAbbasi E, Atik AY, et al. Multiplexed piezoelectric electronic skin with haptic feedback for upper limb prosthesis. Adv. Sensor Res. 2024;3:2400100. doi:10.1002/adsr.202400100.