Sweat, rather than degrading the bond, may actually strengthen it.
For the many people who wear continuous health monitors — glucose sensors, cardiac patches, sleep trackers — skin irritation has long been an unspoken tax on self-knowledge. Researchers at Texas A&M University have developed a water-based adhesive drawn from polyelectrolyte-complex chemistry, originally studied for flame resistance, that may rewrite that bargain. Published in Macromolecular Rapid Communications and already patented, the material matches the bonding strength of leading medical adhesives while working with the body's moisture rather than against it — a quiet but potentially consequential shift in how technology meets skin.
- Millions of wearable device users endure chronic skin irritation — rashes, redness, and inflammation — because the solvent-based adhesives holding their monitors in place are fundamentally hostile to prolonged skin contact.
- The Texas A&M team's PEC adhesive flips the core problem: where conventional adhesives degrade or cause harm when exposed to sweat, the new water-based material may actually bond more strongly as moisture increases.
- Laboratory tests show the adhesive matching the performance of 3M Tegaderm, one of the most trusted medical adhesives on the market, without relying on the solvent chemistry responsible for most user complaints.
- The discovery emerged sideways — from flame-retardant coating research — when Dr. Jaime Grunlan recognized that the inherent stickiness of polyelectrolyte complexes could be redirected toward a completely different human need.
- The adhesive is patented but still early-stage, and the distance between a promising laboratory result and a product worn by someone managing a chronic condition remains long and uncertain.
Anyone who has worn a continuous glucose monitor for more than a few days knows the feeling: a ring of irritated skin, a low-grade itch that builds through the week, and the small dread of peeling the patch off. For millions of people who depend on wearable health monitors, that discomfort is simply the cost of staying informed about their own bodies. A team at Texas A&M University thinks it has found a way to change that.
Dr. Jaime Grunlan, a mechanical engineering professor at Texas A&M, has developed what his team calls the first water-based adhesive designed specifically for wearable medical devices. The work was published in Macromolecular Rapid Communications, and a patent has been secured. The problem it addresses is not new — nearly all commercial wearable devices rely on hydrophobic, solvent-based adhesives that hold well but do not play nicely with skin over extended wear. For people who must monitor continuously, the resulting rashes and inflammation are not minor inconveniences; they can become genuine barriers to consistent care.
Grunlan arrived at the solution from an unexpected direction. His lab had spent years developing polyelectrolyte-complex coatings as flame-retardant treatments for foam and fabric. At some point, he noticed that PECs are inherently sticky — and realized that stickiness might serve an entirely different purpose. Unlike conventional wearable adhesives, which repel moisture, a PEC adhesive works with it. Sweat may actually strengthen the bond rather than degrade it, a meaningful inversion of the usual failure mode.
In laboratory testing, the adhesive matched the bonding strength of 3M Tegaderm, one of the most widely used medical adhesives on the market, without the solvent chemistry that drives most user complaints. The research involved former doctoral students and collaborators across Texas A&M's biomedical engineering department, with funding from a research center focused on underserved populations and an Army innovation grant.
Grunlan and his colleagues are careful to call this early-stage work. The path from a laboratory result to a product worn by someone managing diabetes or recovering from a cardiac event is long. But the potential reach is significant — and if the material survives clinical testing and commercialization, the person absently scratching at the edge of their glucose monitor might eventually have a reason to stop.
Anyone who has worn a continuous glucose monitor for more than a few days knows the feeling: a ring of irritated skin where the adhesive patch meets the arm, a low-grade itch that builds through the week, and the small dread of peeling the thing off. For millions of people who depend on wearable health monitors, that discomfort is simply the cost of staying informed about their own bodies. A team at Texas A&M University thinks it has found a way to change that.
Dr. Jaime Grunlan, who holds the Leland T. Jordan '29 Chair Professorship in the J. Mike Walker '66 Department of Mechanical Engineering at Texas A&M, has developed what his team is calling the first water-based adhesive designed specifically for wearable medical devices. The research was published recently in Macromolecular Rapid Communications, and a patent has already been secured.
The problem Grunlan is solving is not new, but it has been stubbornly persistent. Nearly all commercial wearable devices — glucose monitors, cardiac monitors, sleep-tracking patches — rely on hydrophobic, pressure-sensitive adhesives made from compounds like acrylates, methacrylates, or colophonium. These are solvent-based materials, and while they hold well, they do not play nicely with skin over extended wear. Users report rashes, redness, inflammation, and itching. For people who must wear these devices continuously, the irritation is not a minor inconvenience — it can become a genuine barrier to consistent monitoring.
Grunlan arrived at this problem from an unexpected direction. For years, his lab had been developing one-pot polyelectrolyte-complex coatings — known as PECs — as flame-retardant treatments for foam, fabric, and wood. At some point, he noticed something about the inherent character of PECs: they are sticky. That stickiness, he realized, might be redirected toward an entirely different application.
Polyelectrolyte complexes are water-based, which is the central distinction. Where conventional wearable adhesives repel moisture, a PEC adhesive works with it. Sweat, rather than degrading the bond, may actually strengthen it — the salt content in perspiration appears to increase adhesion rather than undermine it. This is a meaningful inversion of the usual problem, since moisture and physical activity are precisely the conditions under which current adhesives tend to fail or cause the most irritation.
In laboratory testing, the Texas A&M team found that their PEC adhesive could match the bonding strength of 3M Tegaderm, one of the most widely used medical adhesives on the market. Tegaderm is a cyanoacrylate polymer — solvent-based — and while it is effective, Grunlan noted that complaints about skin irritation are common among its users. The ability to replicate that performance without the solvent chemistry is what makes the new material notable.
The research was a collaborative effort. Former doctoral students Drs. Maya Montemayor and Ethan Iverson contributed to the development work. Dr. Balakrishna Haridas, from Texas A&M's Department of Biomechanical Engineering, and his lab conducted the biocompatibility testing that was necessary to bring the findings to publication. Funding came through Dr. Gerard L. Cote and the Precise Advanced Technologies and Health Systems for Underserved Populations Engineering Research Center at Texas A&M, and the project is also part of an Army Phase II Small Business Innovation Research grant.
Grunlan and his colleagues are careful to frame this as early-stage work. The adhesive has been developed and patented, but the road from a laboratory result to a product worn by someone managing Type 1 diabetes or recovering from a cardiac event is long. Still, the potential reach is significant. Wearable health monitors are used by people with diabetes, heart conditions, sleep disorders, and a range of other chronic conditions — populations for whom consistent, comfortable monitoring is not optional.
The question now is whether the material can survive the full gauntlet of clinical testing and commercialization. If it does, the person sitting in a waiting room, absently scratching at the edge of their glucose monitor, might eventually have a reason to stop.
Notable Quotes
To our knowledge, no one has used a PEC as an adhesive for wearable medical devices. We were able to develop and patent a PEC that can match the adhesive strength of 3M Tegaderm — a solvent-based polymer that many people find causes significant skin irritation.— Dr. Jaime Grunlan, Texas A&M University
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why has no one done this before? Water-based adhesives aren't exactly a new concept.
The assumption has always been that moisture is the enemy of adhesion — especially on skin, where sweat is a constant. The whole field oriented itself around hydrophobic materials for that reason.
And PECs flip that assumption?
Apparently so. The salt in sweat seems to actually tighten the bond rather than loosen it. That's a pretty fundamental reversal of the design logic that's driven this space for decades.
How significant is it that they matched 3M Tegaderm's strength?
Tegaderm is essentially the benchmark. If you can meet that bar without the solvent chemistry, you've cleared the most important technical hurdle. Everything else is about proving it holds up in real-world conditions.
Who actually suffers most from the current adhesives?
People who can't take breaks from wearing the device — continuous glucose monitor users, cardiac patients on long-term monitoring. For them, the irritation compounds over days and weeks. It's not cosmetic; it can affect whether they keep wearing the device at all.
The funding trail is interesting — Army SBIR, an underserved populations center. What does that say about where this is headed?
It suggests the ambition isn't just a better product for the existing market. There's an explicit interest in reaching people who currently don't have good access to wearable monitoring — which changes the stakes considerably.
What's the realistic timeline for something like this reaching patients?
The paper doesn't say, and that's honest. Biocompatibility testing is done, which is a real milestone. But regulatory clearance, manufacturing scale-up, and clinical validation could each take years. The patent is filed, which at least protects the path forward.