AUTHOR=Peters Andreas 

TITLE=Regulatory dynamics and empirical evidence in medical device tokenization

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Blockchain

VOLUME=Volume 8 - 2025

YEAR=2025

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/blockchain/articles/10.3389/fbloc.2025.1649131

DOI=10.3389/fbloc.2025.1649131

ISSN=2624-7852

ABSTRACT=BackgroundThe medical device sector, valued at $569 billion, faces persistent financing challenges. Around 78% of startups fail because of capital shortages, not due to lacking technical quality. Blockchain-based tokenization emerges as a way to broaden access, yet success relies on economic factors of platforms and clear regulations.MethodsTransaction cost data from Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP Ledger covered 540 days from January 2024 to June 2025, providing 3,240 observations per network. Experts, numbering 12, participated in a modified Delphi method to form a framework tailored to healthcare. Project outcomes came from Monte Carlo simulations running 10,000 iterations, checked by a triple control-loop system, and compared against two real-world examples. Volumes of transactions drew from stochastic models involving monthly, quarterly, and annual elements, mixing fixed regulatory needs with variable market influences.ResultsLayer-1 (L1) fees differ by orders of magnitude; representative 2025 snapshots show BTC and ETH L1 far above XRPL and major ETH L2s. XRPL fees are typically a tiny fraction of a cent; the base cost is 10 drops (0.00001 XRP) and is dynamically adjusted by network load. Probabilities of success varied from 10.1% to 12.3% on Bitcoin, 31.4%–48.3% on Ethereum based on Layer-2 adoption, and 71.6%–73.2% on XRP Ledger. Investor involvement correlated negatively with logarithms of costs, showing Spearman ρ of −0.91. Differences in success exceeded 60 percentage points across platforms. Examples illustrated how elevated expenses reduce engagement in VitaDAO on Ethereum, whereas low-cost systems like XRP Healthcare support ongoing involvement.ConclusionChoosing a blockchain platform critically influences viability in tokenizing medical devices. Layer-2 options reduce cost gaps but add complexities in bridging and use. Platforms offering stability, minimal fees, and regulatory alignment promote wider inclusion and reliable funding. Technical features, steady costs, and readiness for compliance together shape whether tokenization boosts innovation in healthcare or maintains barriers.