scholarly journals Cardiovascular, ophthalmologic and otolaryngologic medical device innovations – Progress report 2021 from the Twenty20 consortium RESPONSE

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 711-712
Author(s):  
Niels Grabow ◽  
Volkmar Senz ◽  
Klaus-Peter Schmitz
Keyword(s):  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Technology Development ◽  
Progress Report ◽  
Transfer Phase ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Funded Research ◽  
Key Innovations

Abstract The coordinated research project “RESPONSE - Partnership for Innovation in Implant Technology”, which is one of ten BMBF-funded research consortia within the program “Twenty20 - Partnership for Innovation”, is active in the field of medical device innovation. The consortium is currently in the process of unfolding its transfer phase. This involves a portfolio of key innovations for novel medical devices, technologies and processes. Also, RESPONSE is aiming at participative technology development, integrating perspectives of patients, developers, as well as systems and innovation researchers. Particular challenges are arising from the current re-prioritization and re-scheduling of project roadmaps in order to manage and alleviate the effects of the corona crisis.

Regulating Medical Devices in the United States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia J. Zettler ◽  
Erika Lietzan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Complete Information ◽  
The United States ◽  
Risk Level ◽  
Management Tools ◽  
Medical Technologies ◽  
The Us ◽  
Medical Device Regulation

This chapter assesses the regulation of medical devices in the United States. The goal of the US regulatory framework governing medical devices is the same as the goal of the framework governing medicines. US law aims to ensure that medical devices are safe and effective for their intended uses; that they become available for patients promptly; and that manufacturers provide truthful, non-misleading, and complete information about the products. US medical device law is different from US medicines law in many ways, however, perhaps most notably because most marketed devices do not require pre-market approval. The chapter explores how the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) seeks to accomplish its mission with respect to medical devicecough its implementation of its medical device authorities. It starts by explaining what constitutes a medical device and how the FDA classifies medical devices by risk level. The chapter then discusses how medical devices reach the market, the FDA's risk management tools, and the rules and incentives for innovation and competition. It concludes by exploring case studies of innovative medical technologies that challenge the traditional US regulatory scheme to consider the future of medical device regulation.

Medical Device Regulation: Requirements for Dental Professionals Who Prescribe and Manufacture Custom-Made Devices

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-88
Author(s):  
James I. J. Green
Keyword(s):  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Custom Made ◽  
Dental Setting ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Dental Professionals ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Medical Device Regulation

A custom-made device (CMD) is a medical device intended for the sole use of a particular patient. In a dental setting, CMDs include prosthodontic devices, orthodontic appliances, bruxism splints, speech prostheses and devices for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea, trauma prevention and orthognathic surgery facilitation (arch bars and interocclusal wafers). Since 1993, the production and provision of CMDs have been subject to European Union (EU) Directive 93/42/EEC (Medical Device Directive, MDD) given effect in the UK by The Medical Devices Regulations 2002 (Statutory Instrument 2002/618), and its subsequent amendments. Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (Medical Device Regulation, EU MDR) replaces the MDD and the other EU Directive pertaining to Medical Devices, Council Directive 90/385/EEC (Active Implantable Medical Device Directive, AIMDD). The EU MDR was published on 5 April 2017, came into force on 25 May 2017 and, following a three-year transition period was due to be fully implemented and repeal the MDD on 26 May 2020, but was deferred until 26 May 2021 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In the UK, in preparation for the country’s planned departure from the EU, the EU MDR, with necessary amendments, was transposed into UK law (Medical Devices (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, UK MDR). The UK left the Union on 31 January 2020 and entered a transition period that ended on 31 December 2020, meaning that, from 1 January 2021, dental professionals in Great Britain who prescribe and manufacture CMDs are mandated to do so in accordance with the new legislation while Northern Ireland remains in line with the EU legislation and implementation date. This paper sets out the requirements that relate to the production and provision of CMDs in a UK dental setting.

The Bioengineering Design Forum

1997 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick J. Prendergast
Keyword(s):  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Medical Device Industry ◽  
Industry Collaboration ◽  
University Industry ◽  
Device Industry

The author assesses the results of the Bioengineering Design Forum – a collaboration between university researchers, clinicians and industry in Ireland. The aim of the Forum is to initiate, develop and bring to a successful conclusion R&D collaborations that lead to new or improved medical devices. By laying down certain operating procedures for the Forum, an effective ‘meeting ground’ has been developed which serves the objectives of both university engineering departments and the medical device industry in a unique way. The purpose of this paper is to relate our experiences of the Forum; they may be useful to others who would like to attempt similar initiatives in other fields. The author also describes the results that may be expected from this kind of university–industry collaboration in practice.

Medical device’s regulation in South-East Asian countries: Current status and gap areas

2021 ◽  
pp. 173-179
Author(s):  
Vivekanandan Kalaiselvan ◽  
Aishwarya G. ◽  
Ashish Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting ◽  
World Health ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Event Reporting ◽  
Medical Device Regulation

As Medical device application in disease prevention, diagnosis or treatment is evolving to a greater extent; there is a need for regulation to monitor its quality, safety and efficacy. The present article attempts to study the medical device regulation available in eleven South-East Asian World Health Organization (WHO) member countries. The information searched from the available sources reveals that medical device regulation exists in seven countries. Most of the countries follow the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 13485 for their quality standards in medical devices. Most countries also specified the time frame and authority to which adverse event is to be reported. Countries like India and Thailand have separate Adverse Event reporting forms for the medical device. The present study reveals that there is no separate web-based database for adverse event reporting of medical devices. Therefore, WHO South-East Asian Regulators Network (SEARN) under South East Regulatory Office (SERO) office may provide handholding support to these regions in developing a common software or tool for the management and analysis of signals arising from the adverse events.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document