Question‐based development of high‐risk medical devices: A proposal for a structured design and review process

Author:

White Nicholas A.12ORCID,Oude Vrielink Timo J. C.2,van der Bogt Koen E. A.23,Cohen Adam F.24ORCID,Rotmans Joris I.2,Horeman Tim1

Affiliation:

1. Department of BioMechanical Engineering Delft University of Technology Delft The Netherlands

2. Leiden University Medical Centre Leiden The Netherlands

3. University Vascular Centre Leiden | The Hague The Netherlands

4. Centre for Human Drug Research Leiden The Netherlands

Abstract

IntroductionThe recent introduction of the European Medical Device Regulation poses stricter legislation for manufacturers developing medical devices in the EU. Many devices have been placed into a higher risk category, thus requiring more data before market approval, and a much larger focus has been placed on safety. For implantable and Class III devices, the highest risk class, clinical evidence is a necessity. However, the requirements of clinical study design and developmental outcomes are only described in general terms due to the diversity of devices.MethodsA structured approach to determining the requirements for the clinical development of high‐risk medical devices is introduced, utilizing the question‐based development framework, which is already used for pharmaceutical drug development. An example of a novel implantable device for haemodialysis demonstrates how to set up a relevant target product profile defining the device requirements and criteria. The framework can be used in the medical device design phase to define specific questions to be answered during the ensuing clinical development, based upon five general questions, specified by the question‐based framework.ResultsThe result is a clear and evaluable overview of requirements and methodologies to verify and track these requirements in the clinical development phase. Development organizations will be guided to the optimal route, also to abandon projects destined for failure early on to minimize development risks.ConclusionThe framework could facilitate communication with funding agencies, regulators and clinicians, while highlighting remaining ‘known unknowns’ that require answering in the post‐market phase after sufficient benefit is established relative to the risks.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Pharmacology

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3