Cargando…

Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE–MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)

In the European Union (EU), the delivery of health services is a national responsibility but there are concerted actions between member states to protect public health. Approval of pharmaceutical products is the responsibility of the European Medicines Agency, while authorising the placing on the ma...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fraser, Alan G., Nelissen, Rob G.H.H., Kjærsgaard-Andersen, Per, Szymański, Piotr, Melvin, Tom, Piscoi, Paul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8559562/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34760284
http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.6.210081
_version_ 1784592783390015488
author Fraser, Alan G.
Nelissen, Rob G.H.H.
Kjærsgaard-Andersen, Per
Szymański, Piotr
Melvin, Tom
Piscoi, Paul
author_facet Fraser, Alan G.
Nelissen, Rob G.H.H.
Kjærsgaard-Andersen, Per
Szymański, Piotr
Melvin, Tom
Piscoi, Paul
author_sort Fraser, Alan G.
collection PubMed
description In the European Union (EU), the delivery of health services is a national responsibility but there are concerted actions between member states to protect public health. Approval of pharmaceutical products is the responsibility of the European Medicines Agency, while authorising the placing on the market of medical devices is decentralised to independent ‘conformity assessment’ organisations called notified bodies. The first legal basis for an EU system of evaluating medical devices and approving their market access was the Medical Device Directive, from the 1990s. Uncertainties about clinical evidence requirements, among other reasons, led to the EU Medical Device Regulation (2017/745) that has applied since May 2021. It provides general principles for clinical investigations but few methodological details – which challenges responsible authorities to set appropriate balances between regulation and innovation, pre- and post-market studies, and clinical trials and real-world evidence. Scientific experts should advise on methods and standards for assessing and approving new high-risk devices, and safety, efficacy, and transparency of evidence should be paramount. The European Commission recently awarded a Horizon 2020 grant to a consortium led by the European Society of Cardiology and the European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, that will review methodologies of clinical investigations, advise on study designs, and develop recommendations for aggregating clinical data from registries and other real-world sources. The CORE–MD project (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices) will run until March 2024. Here, we describe how it may contribute to the development of regulatory science in Europe. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:839-849. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210081
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8559562
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85595622021-11-09 Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE–MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices) Fraser, Alan G. Nelissen, Rob G.H.H. Kjærsgaard-Andersen, Per Szymański, Piotr Melvin, Tom Piscoi, Paul EFORT Open Rev General Orthopaedics In the European Union (EU), the delivery of health services is a national responsibility but there are concerted actions between member states to protect public health. Approval of pharmaceutical products is the responsibility of the European Medicines Agency, while authorising the placing on the market of medical devices is decentralised to independent ‘conformity assessment’ organisations called notified bodies. The first legal basis for an EU system of evaluating medical devices and approving their market access was the Medical Device Directive, from the 1990s. Uncertainties about clinical evidence requirements, among other reasons, led to the EU Medical Device Regulation (2017/745) that has applied since May 2021. It provides general principles for clinical investigations but few methodological details – which challenges responsible authorities to set appropriate balances between regulation and innovation, pre- and post-market studies, and clinical trials and real-world evidence. Scientific experts should advise on methods and standards for assessing and approving new high-risk devices, and safety, efficacy, and transparency of evidence should be paramount. The European Commission recently awarded a Horizon 2020 grant to a consortium led by the European Society of Cardiology and the European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, that will review methodologies of clinical investigations, advise on study designs, and develop recommendations for aggregating clinical data from registries and other real-world sources. The CORE–MD project (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices) will run until March 2024. Here, we describe how it may contribute to the development of regulatory science in Europe. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:839-849. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210081 British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery 2021-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8559562/ /pubmed/34760284 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.6.210081 Text en © 2021 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
Fraser, Alan G.
Nelissen, Rob G.H.H.
Kjærsgaard-Andersen, Per
Szymański, Piotr
Melvin, Tom
Piscoi, Paul
Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE–MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)
title Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE–MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)
title_full Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE–MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)
title_fullStr Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE–MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)
title_full_unstemmed Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE–MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)
title_short Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE–MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)
title_sort improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of core–md (coordinating research and evidence for medical devices)
topic General Orthopaedics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8559562/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34760284
http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.6.210081
work_keys_str_mv AT fraseralang improvedclinicalinvestigationandevaluationofhighriskmedicaldevicestherationaleandobjectivesofcoremdcoordinatingresearchandevidenceformedicaldevices
AT nelissenrobghh improvedclinicalinvestigationandevaluationofhighriskmedicaldevicestherationaleandobjectivesofcoremdcoordinatingresearchandevidenceformedicaldevices
AT kjærsgaardandersenper improvedclinicalinvestigationandevaluationofhighriskmedicaldevicestherationaleandobjectivesofcoremdcoordinatingresearchandevidenceformedicaldevices
AT szymanskipiotr improvedclinicalinvestigationandevaluationofhighriskmedicaldevicestherationaleandobjectivesofcoremdcoordinatingresearchandevidenceformedicaldevices
AT melvintom improvedclinicalinvestigationandevaluationofhighriskmedicaldevicestherationaleandobjectivesofcoremdcoordinatingresearchandevidenceformedicaldevices
AT piscoipaul improvedclinicalinvestigationandevaluationofhighriskmedicaldevicestherationaleandobjectivesofcoremdcoordinatingresearchandevidenceformedicaldevices
AT improvedclinicalinvestigationandevaluationofhighriskmedicaldevicestherationaleandobjectivesofcoremdcoordinatingresearchandevidenceformedicaldevices