scholarly journals Medical Devices: Regulation, Risk Classification, and Open Innovation

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukas Peter ◽  
Ladislav Hajek ◽  
Petra Maresova ◽  
Martin Augustynek ◽  
Marek Penhaker
Keyword(s):  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Social Structures ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Strategic Decisions ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Risk Class ◽  
Medical Device Manufacturers ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
Medical Device Regulation

In the Czech Republic, the medical device industry is an important sector with a strong tradition and has high added value and perspectives in demand under changing demographic and social structures. The aim of this article is to describe and analyze the complex issues of the new European Commission Medical Device Regulation (MDR) 2017/745 from the perspective of the strategic decisions of companies that have to comply with the requirements imposed on them by the new legislation and at the same time fulfill their own business needs and goals. The legislative changes significantly affect the standards, processes, and certifications in the medical device sector. The classification system of medical devices has been revised to more appropriately reflect the possible health risks associated with use of modern high-end technology in healthcare. The requirement is to categorize each device under the highest possible risk class, which means for the medical device manufacturers to carefully review the new rules and regulations and classify their devices accordingly.

scholarly journals Do Regulatory Changes Seriously Affect the Medical Devices Industry? Evidence From the Czech Republic

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra Maresova ◽  
Lukas Rezny ◽  
Lukas Peter ◽  
Ladislav Hajek ◽  
Frank Lefley
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Single Case ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Regulatory Regime ◽  
Product Recalls ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Emergency Situations ◽  
Medical Device Manufacturers

Background: Within the EU, some of the challenges and perceived risks now facing medical device (MD) developers result from changes in the regulatory framework, emphasizing safety. Therefore, medical technology companies must adopt stricter quality assurance measures so that individual devices can be speedily tracked and retrieved in emergency situations.Objectives: We highlight the challenges and risks faced by the European medical devices industry, particularly those faced by SMEs in the Czech Republic. We address two important research questions: Q1. Do advantages from increased regulation outweigh the additional expenses? Q2. As many MD developers are SMEs, will the new regulatory regime result in some of those companies going out of business and therefore impede future innovation?Methods: The paper focuses on a single case study, with the situation and outcomes discussed in the context of the financial results of a further 50 medical device manufacturers marketing in the Czech Republic.Results: Our findings suggest that the new legislation will result in improved safety, facilitate product recalls, but the cost and administrative burden may be high. The evidence also indicates that some SMEs may be forced to diversify to “non-medical” products, with the inevitable loss of innovative MDs being made available to patients and healthcare providers.

Inevitable Influences: AI-Based Medical Devices at the Intersection of Medical Devices Regulation and the Proposal for AI Regulation

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Sofia Palmieri ◽  
Paulien Walraet ◽  
Tom Goffin
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Medical Field ◽  
Medical Device Manufacturers ◽  
Regulatory Landscape ◽  
Medical Device Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Intervention

Abstract In recent years, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the medical field has attracted increased attention. Due to their impressive advantages, AI systems offer excellent prospects for medical device manufacturers using these systems to upgrade their products. Such AI-based medical devices are already subject to partial regulation within the lines of Medical device regulation 745/2017. However, following the proposal for a regulation on artificial intelligence published by the European Commission, the regulatory landscape for these devices has partially changed. This article aims to clarify the influences that this regulatory intervention by the European Commission brings to the path towards the use and marketing of AI-based medical devices.

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.

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.

A Platform and Multi-sided Market for Translational, Software-defined Medical Research in the Operation Room: OP 4.1 (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magdalena Görtz ◽  
Michael Byczkowski ◽  
Mathias Rath ◽  
Viktoria Schütz ◽  
Philipp Reimold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Heterogeneous Data ◽  
Healthcare Sector ◽  
Successful Development ◽  
Software Developers ◽  
Intelligent Support ◽  
Operation Room ◽  
Central Platform ◽  
Medical Device Manufacturers

BACKGROUND While digital and data-based technologies are widespread in various industries in the context of Industry 4.0, the use of smart, connected devices in healthcare is still in its beginnings. Innovative solutions for the medical environment suffer from difficult access to medical device data and high barriers for market entry due to proprietary systems. OBJECTIVE In the proof-of-concept project OP 4.1, we show the business viability of connecting and augmenting medical devices and data through software add-ons by giving companies a technical and commercial platform for the development, implementation, distribution, and billing of innovative software solutions. METHODS The creation of a central platform prototype requires the collaboration of several independent market contenders, amongst them medical users, software developers, medical device manufacturers, and platform providers. A dedicated consortium of clinical and scientific partners as well as industry partners was established. RESULTS We demonstrate the successful development of the prototype of a user-centric, open, and extensible platform for the intelligent support of processes starting with the operation room. By connecting heterogeneous data sources and medical devices from different manufacturers and making them accessible for software developers and medical users, the cloud-based platform OP 4.1 enables the augmentation of medical devices and procedures through software-based solutions. The platform also allows for the demand-oriented billing of applications and medical devices, thus permitting software-based solutions to fast-track their economic development and become commercially successful. CONCLUSIONS The technology and business platform OP 4.1 creates a multi-sided market for the successful development, implementation, distribution, and billing of new software solutions in the operation room and in the healthcare sector in general. Consequently, software-based medical innovation can be translated into clinical routine fast, efficiently, and cost-effectively, optimizing the treatment of patients through smartly assisted procedures.

Adopting Identification Standards in the Medical Device Supply Chain

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yousef Abdulsalam ◽  
Dari Alhuwail ◽  
Eugene S. Schneller
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Business Intelligence ◽  
Return On Investment ◽  
Survey Methods ◽  
Device Identification ◽  
Medical Device Manufacturers ◽  
High Level ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has recently mandated that medical device manufacturers adopt Unique Device Identification (UDI) standards on their medical devices. The benefits that UDI brings to hospitals and patients is relatively obvious, including inventory transparency, product safety, product equivalency, business intelligence. However, adoption by manufacturers, who face the mandate, has been slow in part because the benefit to them is not as readily perceived. This study focuses on the incentives, barriers, and benefits that medical device manufacturers perceive in UDI adoption. This study seeks to understand which adoption pressures are driving manufacturers to act, and attempts to gauge the benefits to manufacturers from UDI adoption. Through survey methods, the evidence suggests that medical device manufacturers implement UDI largely as a response to the coercive and normative pressures they face. There continues to be a high level of uncertainty regarding the return on investment for the medical device manufacturers, particularly from the late adopters.

scholarly journals Integrating a Usability Engineering Process into a Consisting Risk Management

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 645-647
Author(s):  
Michael Scholtes ◽  
Stephanie Buedenbender ◽  
Annemarie Behrend ◽  
Keywan Sohrabi ◽  
Volker Gross
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Medical Device ◽  
Engineering Process ◽  
Usability Engineering ◽  
User Interactions ◽  
Management Processes ◽  
Medical Device Manufacturers ◽  
Incident Reports ◽  
Development Step ◽  
Medical Device Regulation

AbstractThe complexity of medical devices and its user interactions increases. A growing number of incident reports are assumed to be associated primarily with user errors. This development is tackled through current modifications in standards, such as ISO 13485:2016 and legislations, such as the Medical Device Regulation. Both intensify the focus on use errors significantly. The aim of this paper was the development of a process orientated approach integrating usability engineering into a consisting risk management based on a classic V-model. An appropriate procedure was worked out. For each development step, risk and usability activities were cumulated. Thus, the present paper might help medical device manufacturers to reflect their risk management and usability management processes to find synergies. Prospectively, a step-by-step guide for the integration of risk management and usability engineering based on this approach should be developed.

The Medical Device Regulation of the European Union Intensifies Focus on Clinical Benefits of Devices

2019 ◽  
pp. 216847901987073 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beata Wilkinson ◽  
Robert van Boxtel
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Medical Device ◽  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Real World ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Clinical Investigations ◽  
Clinical Benefits ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Medical Device Regulation

This article comments on the new approach to the clinical evaluation of medical devices in the European Union (EU), which adds consideration of intended clinical benefits to the traditional focus on safety and performance. The article also discusses types of clinical benefits that may be claimed and how evidence for them may be generated. In the EU, determining the benefit-risk profile is an existing core requirement of the clinical evaluation performed according to MEDDEV 2.7/1 Rev 4 guidelines, but under the new Medical Device Regulation (MDR), “intended” clinical benefits must be determined first. The MDR sets high standards for ensuring reliable data are generated from clinical investigations. It stipulates that the endpoints of clinical investigations should include clinical benefits. However, many clinical-use questions arise only after a device is made widely available to patients. For all medical devices, particularly for on-the-market devices never subjected to randomized controlled trials and for new devices developed when these trials were inappropriate/impossible, the postmarket phase of the device is a valuable source of clinical-benefit data. Postmarket clinical follow-up can corroborate and refine predictions of clinical benefits over time. Indirect clinical effects, which may affect treatment adherence and influence patients’ well-being, may surface in the postmarket phase. Real-world clinical data will improve the manufacturer’s understanding of their device’s clinical benefits, potentially changing claims of intended clinical benefits in subsequent clinical evaluations. A paradigm change in clinical evaluation of medical devices in the EU will ensue when manufacturers ensure that their devices deliver real-world clinical benefits.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document