Symposium topic
Three-dimensional (3D) printing is increasingly entering prosthetics and orthotics (P&O), offering customisation, reproducible workflows, and potentially improved access. However, P&O devices are not merely products, they are clinical interventions requiring assessment, biomechanical reasoning, material knowledge, fitting, and quality assurance. Unstructured adoption without an educational and research pathway risks compromising safety, clinical appropriateness, competence, and sustainability. This symposium presents a planned 18-month, education-led model delivered through blended learning by an international education provider, a digital-manufacturing technology partner, and a national rehabilitation institution in Bangladesh. Three sequential modules build clinical foundations, introduce 3D printing, and culminate in dedicated technology-specific training, so learners understand not only how to produce a device, but when, why, and under what clinical conditions 3D printing is appropriate.
Underpinning science and theory
The model is grounded in competency-based education and scaffolded, blended learning, in which technology-specific skills follow established clinical foundations. Its safety-first logic draws on emerging evidence for 3D-printed device quality, material performance, and digital-workflow reliability. As planned, it is designed to generate prospective evidence rather than presume proven equivalence or superiority.
Relevance for the ISPO World Congress
This addresses the congress theme, “A World Connected: Advancing Assistive Technologies for Global Equity,” by showing how a globally relevant digital technology can be adopted responsibly—through education, supervised practice, and quality assurance—without compromising clinical standards. It offers a transferable governance model for safe technology translation across diverse health systems.
Perspectives
Presenters debate what constitutes sufficient safeguarding before 3D-printed P&O devices are fitted to users. The education perspective argues for demonstrated competence before technology adoption, the digital-manufacturing perspective emphasises timely access, workflow efficiency, and innovation, and the clinical perspective examines material safety, fit, accountability, and outcome evidence. The discussion centres on how much training, evidence, and quality assurance are needed for responsible adoption.
Learning objectives
Contrast education-led and technology-first approaches to adopting 3D printing in P&O
identify quality-assurance, material, and patient-safety considerations specific to 3D-printed devices
Explain how staged, competency-based sequencing supports safe digital fabrication
Appraise what clinical evidence and governance are needed before wider adoption
Outline priority research directions, including device quality, clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and implementation feasibility
