Cargando…
New medical device regulations: the regulator’s view
Advances in medical device technology have been dramatic in recent years resulting in both an increased number of medical devices and an increase in the invasiveness and critical function which devices perform. Two new regulations entered into force in Europe in May 2017, the Medical Device Regulati...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6598613/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31312522 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180061 |
_version_ | 1783430810459701248 |
---|---|
author | Melvin, Tom Torre, Marina |
author_facet | Melvin, Tom Torre, Marina |
author_sort | Melvin, Tom |
collection | PubMed |
description | Advances in medical device technology have been dramatic in recent years resulting in both an increased number of medical devices and an increase in the invasiveness and critical function which devices perform. Two new regulations entered into force in Europe in May 2017, the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and the In Vitro Diagnostic Device Regulation (IVDR). These regulations will replace the current directives over the coming years. These regulations, for the first time introduce requirements relating to registries. Medical device manufacturers are required to have systematic methods for examining their devices once available on the market, by systematically gathering, recording and analysing data on safety and performance. Registries can assist public health protection in very practical ways, for example, to help urgently identify patients or devices. Registries can also be powerful tools for collecting and appraising real-world clinical evidence concerning medical devices. Clinical investigations are limited in terms of the sample size and the duration of follow-up which can reasonably be expected. Registries may also be the only available tool to examine rare adverse effects, sub-populations or for time durations which it is not possible or feasible to study in a clinical investigation. By ensuring that a core dataset is collected which can be compared to other registries or trial data, it is possible to pool data to better examine outcomes. There are a range of excellent initiatives which have aimed at ensuring the appropriate regulatory application of registry data. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180061 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6598613 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65986132019-07-16 New medical device regulations: the regulator’s view Melvin, Tom Torre, Marina EFORT Open Rev General Orthopaedics Advances in medical device technology have been dramatic in recent years resulting in both an increased number of medical devices and an increase in the invasiveness and critical function which devices perform. Two new regulations entered into force in Europe in May 2017, the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and the In Vitro Diagnostic Device Regulation (IVDR). These regulations will replace the current directives over the coming years. These regulations, for the first time introduce requirements relating to registries. Medical device manufacturers are required to have systematic methods for examining their devices once available on the market, by systematically gathering, recording and analysing data on safety and performance. Registries can assist public health protection in very practical ways, for example, to help urgently identify patients or devices. Registries can also be powerful tools for collecting and appraising real-world clinical evidence concerning medical devices. Clinical investigations are limited in terms of the sample size and the duration of follow-up which can reasonably be expected. Registries may also be the only available tool to examine rare adverse effects, sub-populations or for time durations which it is not possible or feasible to study in a clinical investigation. By ensuring that a core dataset is collected which can be compared to other registries or trial data, it is possible to pool data to better examine outcomes. There are a range of excellent initiatives which have aimed at ensuring the appropriate regulatory application of registry data. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180061 British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery 2019-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6598613/ /pubmed/31312522 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180061 Text en © 2019 The author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed. |
spellingShingle | General Orthopaedics Melvin, Tom Torre, Marina New medical device regulations: the regulator’s view |
title | New medical device regulations: the regulator’s view |
title_full | New medical device regulations: the regulator’s view |
title_fullStr | New medical device regulations: the regulator’s view |
title_full_unstemmed | New medical device regulations: the regulator’s view |
title_short | New medical device regulations: the regulator’s view |
title_sort | new medical device regulations: the regulator’s view |
topic | General Orthopaedics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6598613/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31312522 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180061 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT melvintom newmedicaldeviceregulationstheregulatorsview AT torremarina newmedicaldeviceregulationstheregulatorsview |