Premarket evaluation of medical devices: a cross-sectional analysis of clinical studies submitted to a German ethics committee.

Objective: To assess the methodological quality of pre-market clinical studies performed on medical devices (MDs), including in-vitro diagnostic (IVD) MDs, in Europe.

Design: Observational cross-sectional study.

Setting: A large German ethics committee.

Materials: From the consecutive sample of study applications between March 2010 and December 2013, we selected MD study applications requiring approval by an ethics committee and the competent federal authority. These included pre-market studies on devices that had not yet received a CE (Conformité Européenne) mark or had previously been CE marked for a different indication. Also included were post-CE studies requiring federal authority approval because the study entailed additional invasive or otherwise burdensome components.

Primary And Secondary Outcome Measures: Besides the design of the studies, we assessed the planned sample size, study duration and other aspects.

Results: 122 study applications were analysed: 98 (80%) concerned therapeutic rather than diagnostic devices and 84 (69%) were pre-market studies. The proportion of studies on class I, IIa, IIb and III devices was 10%, 15%, 28% and 39%, respectively. 10 studies (8%) investigated IVD MDs. A randomised controlled trial (RCT) was planned in 70 (57%) of the 122 applications; studies with non-randomised control groups (n=23; 19%) or without controls (n=29; 24%) were less common. In the sub-group of pre-market studies on therapeutic devices, the proportion of RCTs was 66% (43/65). The median sample size was 120 participants or samples (IQR 53-229). The median study duration was 24 (14-38) months. 87 studies (71%) considered at least one patient-relevant outcome. 12 (17%) and 37 (53%) of the 70 RCTs applied a fully or partially blinded design, respectively.

Conclusion: A large proportion of MD studies in Germany apply a randomised controlled design, thus contradicting the industry argument that RCTs on MDs are commonly infeasible.