Cargando…

Medical device vigilance systems: India, US, UK, and Australia

The term medical device includes a wide category of products ranging from therapeutic medical devices exerting their effects locally such as tissue cutting, wound covering or propping open clogged arteries, to highly sophisticated computerized medical equipment and diagnostic medical devices. To ach...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gupta, Pooja, Janodia, Manthan D, Jagadish, Puralea C, Udupa, Nayanabhirama
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3417867/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22915923
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S12396
_version_ 1782240551353974784
author Gupta, Pooja
Janodia, Manthan D
Jagadish, Puralea C
Udupa, Nayanabhirama
author_facet Gupta, Pooja
Janodia, Manthan D
Jagadish, Puralea C
Udupa, Nayanabhirama
author_sort Gupta, Pooja
collection PubMed
description The term medical device includes a wide category of products ranging from therapeutic medical devices exerting their effects locally such as tissue cutting, wound covering or propping open clogged arteries, to highly sophisticated computerized medical equipment and diagnostic medical devices. To achieve uniformity among the national medical device regulatory systems and increase the access to safe, effective, and clinically beneficial medical technologies, the Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF) was conceived in 1992 by five members: European Union, United States, Australia, Japan, and Canada. All regulated countries have clearly defined medical devices, as has the GHTF. Although GHTF has tried to achieve harmonization with respect to medical devices, some differences still exist in the national laws of the countries of GHTF. Further, regulated countries have classified medical devices on the basis of their associated risk. In the Indian regulatory system, medical devices are still considered as drugs. In 2006, the Medical Device Regulation Bill was recommended to consolidate laws for medical devices and to establish the Medical Device Regulatory Authority of India. In addition, medical devices are not classified by any Indian regulatory authority. Although India has moved towards harmonizing its medical device regulations with those of regulated countries, this study aims to identify whether India should have a vigilance system in harmony with those of GHTF or develop its own system for medical devices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3417867
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34178672012-08-22 Medical device vigilance systems: India, US, UK, and Australia Gupta, Pooja Janodia, Manthan D Jagadish, Puralea C Udupa, Nayanabhirama Med Devices (Auckl) Perspectives The term medical device includes a wide category of products ranging from therapeutic medical devices exerting their effects locally such as tissue cutting, wound covering or propping open clogged arteries, to highly sophisticated computerized medical equipment and diagnostic medical devices. To achieve uniformity among the national medical device regulatory systems and increase the access to safe, effective, and clinically beneficial medical technologies, the Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF) was conceived in 1992 by five members: European Union, United States, Australia, Japan, and Canada. All regulated countries have clearly defined medical devices, as has the GHTF. Although GHTF has tried to achieve harmonization with respect to medical devices, some differences still exist in the national laws of the countries of GHTF. Further, regulated countries have classified medical devices on the basis of their associated risk. In the Indian regulatory system, medical devices are still considered as drugs. In 2006, the Medical Device Regulation Bill was recommended to consolidate laws for medical devices and to establish the Medical Device Regulatory Authority of India. In addition, medical devices are not classified by any Indian regulatory authority. Although India has moved towards harmonizing its medical device regulations with those of regulated countries, this study aims to identify whether India should have a vigilance system in harmony with those of GHTF or develop its own system for medical devices. Dove Medical Press 2010-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC3417867/ /pubmed/22915923 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S12396 Text en © 2010 Gupta et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Perspectives
Gupta, Pooja
Janodia, Manthan D
Jagadish, Puralea C
Udupa, Nayanabhirama
Medical device vigilance systems: India, US, UK, and Australia
title Medical device vigilance systems: India, US, UK, and Australia
title_full Medical device vigilance systems: India, US, UK, and Australia
title_fullStr Medical device vigilance systems: India, US, UK, and Australia
title_full_unstemmed Medical device vigilance systems: India, US, UK, and Australia
title_short Medical device vigilance systems: India, US, UK, and Australia
title_sort medical device vigilance systems: india, us, uk, and australia
topic Perspectives
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3417867/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22915923
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S12396
work_keys_str_mv AT guptapooja medicaldevicevigilancesystemsindiausukandaustralia
AT janodiamanthand medicaldevicevigilancesystemsindiausukandaustralia
AT jagadishpuraleac medicaldevicevigilancesystemsindiausukandaustralia
AT udupanayanabhirama medicaldevicevigilancesystemsindiausukandaustralia