Cargando…

IDEAL-D Framework for Device Innovation: A Consensus Statement on the Preclinical Stage

OBJECTIVE: To extend the IDEAL framework for device innovation, IDEAL-D, to include the preclinical stage of development (stage 0). BACKGROUND: In previous work, the IDEAL collaboration has proposed frameworks for new surgical techniques and complex therapeutic technologies, the central tenet being...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Marcus, Hani J., Bennett, Amy, Chari, Aswin, Day, Toni, Hirst, Allison, Hughes-Hallett, Archie, Kolias, Angelos, Kwasnicki, Richard M., Martin, Janet, Rovers, Maroeska, Squire, Sarah E., McCulloch, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8683254/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33856386
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004907
_version_ 1784617374501044224
author Marcus, Hani J.
Bennett, Amy
Chari, Aswin
Day, Toni
Hirst, Allison
Hughes-Hallett, Archie
Kolias, Angelos
Kwasnicki, Richard M.
Martin, Janet
Rovers, Maroeska
Squire, Sarah E.
McCulloch, Peter
author_facet Marcus, Hani J.
Bennett, Amy
Chari, Aswin
Day, Toni
Hirst, Allison
Hughes-Hallett, Archie
Kolias, Angelos
Kwasnicki, Richard M.
Martin, Janet
Rovers, Maroeska
Squire, Sarah E.
McCulloch, Peter
author_sort Marcus, Hani J.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To extend the IDEAL framework for device innovation, IDEAL-D, to include the preclinical stage of development (stage 0). BACKGROUND: In previous work, the IDEAL collaboration has proposed frameworks for new surgical techniques and complex therapeutic technologies, the central tenet being that development and evaluation can and should proceed together in an ordered and logical manner that balances innovation and safety. METHODS: Following agreement at the IDEAL Collaboration Council, a multidisciplinary working group was formed comprising 12 representatives from healthcare, academia, industry, and a patient advocate. The group conducted a series of discussions following the principles used in the development of the original IDEAL framework. Importantly, IDEAL aims for maximal transparency, optimal validity in the evaluation of primary effects, and minimization of potential risk to patients or others. The proposals were subjected to further review and editing by members of the IDEAL Council before a final consensus version was adopted. RESULTS: In considering which studies are required before a first-in-human study, we have: (1) classified devices according to what they do and the risks they carry, (2) classified studies according to what they show about the device, and (3) made recommendations based on the principle that the more invasive and high risk a device is, the greater proof required of their safety and effectiveness before progression to clinical studies (stage 1). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed recommendations for preclinical evaluation of medical devices represent a proportionate and pragmatic approach that balances the de-risking of first-in-human translational studies against the benefits of rapid translation of new devices into clinical practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8683254
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86832542021-12-23 IDEAL-D Framework for Device Innovation: A Consensus Statement on the Preclinical Stage Marcus, Hani J. Bennett, Amy Chari, Aswin Day, Toni Hirst, Allison Hughes-Hallett, Archie Kolias, Angelos Kwasnicki, Richard M. Martin, Janet Rovers, Maroeska Squire, Sarah E. McCulloch, Peter Ann Surg Review Papers OBJECTIVE: To extend the IDEAL framework for device innovation, IDEAL-D, to include the preclinical stage of development (stage 0). BACKGROUND: In previous work, the IDEAL collaboration has proposed frameworks for new surgical techniques and complex therapeutic technologies, the central tenet being that development and evaluation can and should proceed together in an ordered and logical manner that balances innovation and safety. METHODS: Following agreement at the IDEAL Collaboration Council, a multidisciplinary working group was formed comprising 12 representatives from healthcare, academia, industry, and a patient advocate. The group conducted a series of discussions following the principles used in the development of the original IDEAL framework. Importantly, IDEAL aims for maximal transparency, optimal validity in the evaluation of primary effects, and minimization of potential risk to patients or others. The proposals were subjected to further review and editing by members of the IDEAL Council before a final consensus version was adopted. RESULTS: In considering which studies are required before a first-in-human study, we have: (1) classified devices according to what they do and the risks they carry, (2) classified studies according to what they show about the device, and (3) made recommendations based on the principle that the more invasive and high risk a device is, the greater proof required of their safety and effectiveness before progression to clinical studies (stage 1). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed recommendations for preclinical evaluation of medical devices represent a proportionate and pragmatic approach that balances the de-risking of first-in-human translational studies against the benefits of rapid translation of new devices into clinical practice. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-01 2021-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8683254/ /pubmed/33856386 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004907 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
spellingShingle Review Papers
Marcus, Hani J.
Bennett, Amy
Chari, Aswin
Day, Toni
Hirst, Allison
Hughes-Hallett, Archie
Kolias, Angelos
Kwasnicki, Richard M.
Martin, Janet
Rovers, Maroeska
Squire, Sarah E.
McCulloch, Peter
IDEAL-D Framework for Device Innovation: A Consensus Statement on the Preclinical Stage
title IDEAL-D Framework for Device Innovation: A Consensus Statement on the Preclinical Stage
title_full IDEAL-D Framework for Device Innovation: A Consensus Statement on the Preclinical Stage
title_fullStr IDEAL-D Framework for Device Innovation: A Consensus Statement on the Preclinical Stage
title_full_unstemmed IDEAL-D Framework for Device Innovation: A Consensus Statement on the Preclinical Stage
title_short IDEAL-D Framework for Device Innovation: A Consensus Statement on the Preclinical Stage
title_sort ideal-d framework for device innovation: a consensus statement on the preclinical stage
topic Review Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8683254/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33856386
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004907
work_keys_str_mv AT marcushanij idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT bennettamy idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT chariaswin idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT daytoni idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT hirstallison idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT hugheshallettarchie idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT koliasangelos idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT kwasnickirichardm idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT martinjanet idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT roversmaroeska idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT squiresarahe idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage
AT mccullochpeter idealdframeworkfordeviceinnovationaconsensusstatementonthepreclinicalstage