Context: Recent debates and events have brought into question the effectiveness of existing regulatory frameworks for medical devices in the United States and Europe to ensure their performance, safety, and quality. This article provides a comparative analysis of medical device regulation in the two jurisdictions, explores current reforms to improve the existing systems, and discusses additional actions that should be considered to fully meet this aim. Medical device regulation must be improved to safeguard public health and ensure that high-quality and effective technologies reach patients.

Methods: We explored and analyzed medical device regulatory systems in the United States and Europe in accordance with the available gray and peer-reviewed literature and legislative documents.

Findings: The two regulatory systems differ in their mandate and orientation, organization, pre- and postmarket evidence requirements, and transparency of process. Despite these differences, both jurisdictions face similar challenges for ensuring that only safe and effective devices reach the market, monitoring real-world use, and exchanging pertinent information on devices with key users such as clinicians and patients. To address these issues, reforms have recently been introduced or debated in the United States and Europe that are principally focused on strengthening regulatory processes, enhancing postmarket regulation through more robust surveillance systems, and improving the traceability and monitoring of devices. Some changes in premarket requirements for devices are being considered.

Conclusions: Although the current reforms address some of the outstanding challenges in device regulation, additional steps are needed to improve existing policy. We examine a number of actions to be considered, such as requiring high-quality evidence of benefit for medium- and high-risk devices; moving toward greater centralization and coordination of regulatory approval in Europe; creating links between device identifier systems and existing data collection tools, such as electronic health records; and fostering increased and more effective use of registries to ensure safe postmarket use of new and existing devices.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955380PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12043DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

medical device
16
device regulation
16
united states
16
states europe
16
current reforms
8
improve existing
8
actions considered
8
regulatory systems
8
devices
7
device
6

Similar Publications

Purpose: When treating amblyopia, it is important to define when visual acuity (VA) is no longer improving (i.e., stable) because treatment decisions may be altered based on this determination.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: The main objective of this study was to conduct a radioanatomical study of the osteo-myo-cutaneous scapulo-dorsal pedicled flap.

Methods: A radiological study was performed to study the anatomical variations of the dorsal scapular pedicle (origin, course of the deep branch of the dorsal scapular artery (DSA) in relation to the medial border of the scapula, perforators from the superficial branch of the DSA). Perforators from the superficial branch of the DSA were also identified on anatomical subjects, and their cutaneous vascular territory was determined.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

External fixation is a powerful tool in orthopaedic trauma surgery. Beyond serving as provisional or temporizing fixation, external fixation has utility as an intraoperative reduction tool, adjunct to internal fixation, and definitive fixation. It is important to summarize the indications, techniques, and considerations of various roles of external fixation in orthopaedic trauma.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is an increasingly common challenge for arthroplasty surgeons. The survivorship of rTKA is significantly lower than that of primary total knee arthroplasty, resulting in increasing numbers of repeat rTKA. These repeat rTKAs present unique challenges including potentially massive bone loss and increased risk of infection.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is an increasingly common challenge for arthroplasty surgeons. The survivorship of rTKA is significantly lower than that of primary total knee arthroplasty, resulting in an increasing incidence of repeat rTKA. These cases present multifactorial challenges including the skin and soft-tissue envelopes, bone loss, ligamentous compromise, and often a history of periprosthetic joint infection.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!