The Elsmar Cove Wiki More Free Files The Elsmar Cove Forums Discussion Thread Index Post Attachments Listing Failure Modes Services and Solutions to Problems Elsmar cove Forums Main Page Elsmar Cove Home Page
Miner's MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) Blog   Elsmar.com Forum Home Page
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Medical Devices, Medical Information Technology, Medical Software and Health Informatics > Medical Device Related Standards > ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management
Forum Username

Search the Elsmar Cove
Custom Search
Monitor the Elsmar Forum
Follow Marc & Elsmar
Elsmar Cove Forum RSS Feed  Marc Smith's Google+ Page  Marc Smith's Linked In Page   Marc Smith's Elsmar Cove YouTube Page  Marc Smith's Facebook Page  Elsmar Cove Twitter Feed
Elsmar Cove Groups
Elsmar Cove Google+ Group  Elsmar Cove LinkedIn Group  Elsmar Cove Facebook Group
Donate and $ Contributor Forum Access

Courtesy Quick Links

Links that Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:

Howard's
International Quality Services
Marcelo Antunes'
SQR Consulting
Bob Doering's
Correct SPC - Precision Machining

NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook
IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors
SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers
Quality Digest Portal
IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology
ASQ - American Society for Quality

Related Topic Tags
iso 14971 - medical device risk management
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1  
Old 20th July 2012, 05:18 AM
rob73's Avatar
rob73

 
 
Posts: 151
Look! New version BS EN ISO 14971:2012 released - July 2012

BSI have now released BS EN ISO 14971:2012, more informative references between the standard and MDD 93/42EEC have been added, specifically:
*Treatment of negligable risks
*Discresionary power of manuf. as to the acceptability of risks
*Risk reduction "as far as possilbe" VS "as low as reasonably possible"
*Discretion as to whether as risk benifit analysis needs to tkae place
*Discretion as to the risk control option/measures
*Deviation as to the first risk control method
*Information of the users influencing the residual risk

Rob
Thank You to rob73 for your informative Post and/or Attachment!

Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 20th July 2012, 09:38 AM
Chrisx

 
 
Posts: 63
Re: New version BS EN ISO 14971:2012 released - July 2012

I notice that the reference on CEN still says ISO 14971:2007 in parentheses and the ISO website still cites ISO 14971:2007. Is this really a significant change to the standard or is this just a change to the preamble to address the formal objection made to this standard? It sounds like this might be a simillar case as EN ISO 13485:2012. Does anyone know?
Sponsored Links

  #3  
Old 23rd July 2012, 09:37 PM
Marcelo Antunes's Avatar
Marcelo Antunes

 
 
Posts: 2,465
Re: New version BS EN ISO 14971:2012 released - July 2012

Itīs different than the case of EN ISO 13485:2012. There are 7 technical deviations (regarding the topics rob73 mentioned).

Thereīs some more comments on this thread - Updates on ISO TS 24971 and formal objection of the European Commission to ISO 14971
Thank You to Marcelo Antunes for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  #4  
Old 24th July 2012, 02:14 PM
Chrisx

 
 
Posts: 63
Re: New version BS EN ISO 14971:2012 released - July 2012

It sounds like more political nonsense, with no real improvement in safety. So, it is no longer acceptable to reduce risks to as low as practicable. Now, I have to reduce risk to as low as possible. I guess this means sampling is no longer acceptable, as 100% inspection would further reduce the risks. New products are inherently riskier then exisiting products. So much for innovation, it is not as low a risk a possible. For process validation, a sample size based on a 95/95 confidence interval is no longer possible. It is not as low a risk as possible. It has to be 99.9999/99.9999 with a sample size of 10 million units. Sounds like more stuff created by politicians with no idea what risk management really is. Did anyone ever consider the impact of "as low as possible", or did it just sound neat. If ALARP is good, then ALAP must be even better.
Thank You to Chrisx for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  #5  
Old 11th September 2012, 01:56 PM
xcanals_tecno-med.es's Avatar
xcanals_tecno-med.es

 
 
Posts: 76
Look! Re: New version BS EN ISO 14971:2012 released - July 2012

Dear all

Always a standard entity provides the annex for people which was already buyed the 2009 version. Se at:

http://webshop.ds.dk/catalog/documen...0_attachPV.pdf

Regards

Xavier
Thank You to xcanals_tecno-med.es for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  #6  
Old 11th September 2012, 02:19 PM
Chrisx

 
 
Posts: 63
Re: New version BS EN ISO 14971:2012 released - July 2012

Thanks for providing the document. However it seems to be a rather impractical approach. I now have to consider all negligible risks, even if it is unlikely. This would seem to be an endless and impossible task. For example, do I have to consider that someone might try to fix their house with our spine pedicle screws. What if part of the house falls downs, because a pedicle screw is desinged to hold bone together, not houses. Do I have to consider that someone might heat our screws up with a blowtorch and then stick them up their butt. There are an endless number of negligible risks that are very unlikely to occur and nearly impossible to mitigate. Maybe I don't understand what they mean by this document, but to me it seems impossible to comply.

The conclusion that information given to the user to reduce risk is not a risk mitigation is nonsense, but I guess I can comply with this one. However, it means I will no longer consider risk when deciding what warning or contraindications in the IFU. This would seem to be counterproductive in reducing risk. How else do I decide what to put in the IFU, except by copying what is in my competitors IFU. IMHO, the people who asked for this clearly don't understand risk management and are more interested in polics and playing I gotcha rather then ensuring the safety of medical devices. It is in my opinion sad to see ISO 14971 damaged in this manner.
Thank You to Chrisx for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  #7  
Old 11th September 2012, 04:57 PM
MIREGMGR

 
 
Posts: 3,361
Re: New version BS EN ISO 14971:2012 released - July 2012

I think this is territory that will have to be re-visited if/when US FDA and EU authorities ever decide to proceed toward harmonization. My view was that the common interpretation of the previous version of ISO 14971 was consistent with the US FDA approach to regulation, and the ZA re-interpretation moves the standard quite far from that prior consistency in important ways.

My view is that the prior interpretation of ISO 14971 and what I understand to be the past US FDA view of risk management are greatly preferable to the ZA approach, and by implication the straitjacket-precise interpretation of 93/42/EEC that ZA requires, in regard both to being applicable and supervisable in ways that achieve the most healthcare for a given societal economic cost, and to avoidance of intellectual dishonesty or willful ignorance on the part of regulatory participants.
  #8  
Old 12th September 2012, 03:05 PM
MIREGMGR

 
 
Posts: 3,361
Re: New version BS EN ISO 14971:2012 released - July 2012

I do my best to be charitable about the limitations of a standards creation process that is implemented by real people, but to my thinking, the current state of Annex ZA is pretty inadequate as a work product.

"Content Deviations", item 3(b) says that the MDD requires "risks to be reduced 'as far as possible' without there being room for economic considerations."

Except that's not what the MDD says.

Annex I Section 2, for instance, requires that device designs "must conform to safety principles" (which thereafter are enumerated, beginning with "eliminate or reduce risks as far as possible"), but conditions this requirement by going on to state "taking account of the generally acknowledged state of the art."

When I went to engineering school, we were taught that the "state of the art" in science was what is physically and chemically possible...a purely theoretical definition...but that the "state of the art" in engineering additionally requires determination of functional optimality and economical feasibility as judged by the organization to which the engineer is responsible. I doubt very much if well taught engineering students learned otherwise a hundred years before me, and I'm pretty confident that engineering students still learn that today.

Scientists create theoretical understanding. Engineers create real products and services...including medical devices. I've yet to hear of a medical device company or a national health system that isn't affected by economics.

So how did the committee that settled on the wording of Annex ZA arrive at "...without there being room for economic considerations"?

If the author of those words worked for me and presented that as a draft, we would have had a little talk about reading comprehension and how much medical care could be provided in a cost-no-object system, and they would have gone back to do it again.
Thank You to MIREGMGR for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Medical Devices, Medical Information Technology, Medical Software and Health Informatics > Medical Device Related Standards > ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management

Do you find this discussion thread helpful and informational?


Bookmarks


Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Forum Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
July 2012 CB Aerospace Auditor Workshop Sidney Vianna AS9100, Nadcap and related Aerospace Standards and Requirements 3 23rd July 2012 04:59 PM
Happy 4th of July - 2012 Mikishots Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 3 4th July 2012 01:24 PM
AS9110B has been released - April 2012 kiwisfly AS9100, Nadcap and related Aerospace Standards and Requirements 29 11th June 2012 05:50 PM
ISO 9001:2000 Certificate - Original approval date 18 July 1995 and valid until 2012 htquality ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 - Questions and Discussions 27 9th June 2011 12:59 PM



The time now is 08:19 PM. All times are GMT -4.
Your time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.


   


Marc Timothy Smith - Elsmar.com
8466 LeSourdsville-West Chester Road, Olde West Chester, Ohio 45069-1929
513 341-6272
NOTE: This forum uses "cookies".