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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |