SBS - The best value in QMS software

Clinical accuracy and repeatability of IR(infrared) thermometer, no maximum error criteria is recommended in ISO

R

Rayjade Ko

Registered
#1
#1
When plan the clinical validation study of IR forehead thermometer, all procedures are based on ISO 80601-2-56 or ASTM-E1965-98.

These standards recommend explicit methods for the determination of laboratory accuracy, clinical accuracy and clinical repeatability.
However, only laboratory accuracy is assigned an maximum error criteria ( ±0,3 °C ) within the RATED OUTPUT RANGE.
For clinical accuracy and repeatability, no maximum error criteria is recommended.
So I don't know if the clinical result of IR forehead thermometer is acceptable or not.

Is there any explanations?
 
Join a DISCUS webinar
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
R

Rayjade Ko

Registered
#3
#3
indubioush said:
Many customer requirements do not come from standards.
Click to expand...
TThank you. And sorry, I didn't get that. Could you please illustrate?
I thought a medical device must be legally agreed by acceptance criteria for clinical accuracy or repeatability to be validated,
especially for device with diagnostic functions (ex: febrile or non-febrile).
Otherwise, we don't know how much accurate in clinical use it needs to be safe.
 
somashekar

somashekar

Staff member
Super Moderator
#4
#4
Rayjade Ko said:
When plan the clinical validation study of IR forehead thermometer, all procedures are based on ISO 80601-2-56 or ASTM-E1965-98.

These standards recommend explicit methods for the determination of laboratory accuracy, clinical accuracy and clinical repeatability.
However, only laboratory accuracy is assigned an maximum error criteria ( ±0,3 °C ) within the RATED OUTPUT RANGE.
For clinical accuracy and repeatability, no maximum error criteria is recommended.
So I don't know if the clinical result of IR forehead thermometer is acceptable or not.

Is there any explanations?
Click to expand...
The average normal body temperature is generally accepted as 98.6°F (37°C). Some studies have shown that the "normal" body temperature can have a wide range, from 97°F (36.1°C) to 99°F (37.2°C). A temperature over 100.4°F (38°C) most often means you have a fever caused by an infection or illness.
This could be one of the reason. Let me know if this helped.....
 
R

Rayjade Ko

Registered
#5
#5
somashekar said:
The average normal body temperature is generally accepted as 98.6°F (37°C). Some studies have shown that the "normal" body temperature can have a wide range, from 97°F (36.1°C) to 99°F (37.2°C). A temperature over 100.4°F (38°C) most often means you have a fever caused by an infection or illness.
This could be one of the reason. Let me know if this helped.....
Click to expand...
Sorry to reply this late. It helps me be aware of the variability of temperature difference between MEASURING SITE and REFERENCE BODY SITE. For all the human subjects, this difference might not be the same, right?
For example, axillary temp is recorded 0.7C lower than core temp; however; no uncertainty of this value is ever provided. Might this also be the reason?
 
I

indubioush

Quite Involved in Discussions
#6
#6
Rayjade Ko said:
I didn't get that. Could you please illustrate?
Click to expand...
You are a medical device manufacturer, correct?
Do you have a design history file?
In your design history file, do you have customer requirements and design requirements documented? You are required to have this if you are following ISO 13485. See sections 7.2.1 Determination of requirements related to product and 7.3.3 Design and development inputs.
 
somashekar

somashekar

Staff member
Super Moderator
#7
#7
Rayjade Ko said:
Sorry to reply this late. It helps me be aware of the variability of temperature difference between MEASURING SITE and REFERENCE BODY SITE. For all the human subjects, this difference might not be the same, right?
For example, axillary temp is recorded 0.7C lower than core temp; however; no uncertainty of this value is ever provided. Might this also be the reason?
Click to expand...
You are correct.
The temperature measuing site has been forehead, wrist, underarms, under the tongue, rectum and the technology has been from human feel to mercury in capillary type thermometer to digital thermometer to thermometer probe of patient monitor to now IR thermometer.
 
R

Rayjade Ko

Registered
#8
#8
indubioush said:
You are a medical device manufacturer, correct?
Do you have a design history file?
In your design history file, do you have customer requirements and design requirements documented? You are required to have this if you are following ISO 13485. See sections 7.2.1 Determination of requirements related to product and 7.3.3 Design and development inputs.
Click to expand...
Thanks a lot. I didn't notice the support from ISO 13485 before, and customers did require the spec to be competitive with other benchmark device's.
And in ISO 80601-2-56, there's such statement: "This document requires both clinical VALIDATION and laboratory VERIFICATION for all types of ADJUSTED MODES (of clinical thermometer) ." Then what's the difference in between VALIDATION and VERIFICATION?

So....., here's my simple thoughts,

Is that clinical accuracy should be validated, to get value in a correct way?
There might not be acceptance criteria defined by ISO standards, we only need to meet customer's requirement.

And that laboratory accuracy must be verified, to get the correct value?
There is indeed acceptance criteria defined by ISO standards, we need to follow that.
 
R

Rayjade Ko

Registered
#9
#9
somashekar said:
You are correct.
The temperature measuing site has been forehead, wrist, underarms, under the tongue, rectum and the technology has been from human feel to mercury in capillary type thermometer to digital thermometer to thermometer probe of patient monitor to now IR thermometer.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply, I'm still looking for reasons for the uncertainty of physiological offsets in different body sites, and how the uncertainty is harmonized with the ISO standards.
 
somashekar

somashekar

Staff member
Super Moderator
#10
#10
Rayjade Ko said:
Thank you for your reply, I'm still looking for reasons for the uncertainty of physiological offsets in different body sites, and how the uncertainty is harmonized with the ISO standards.
Click to expand...
I am not sure if ISO has researched on this toipc and harmonized within its standards.
Please do check if the attahed article will be helpful to you.... Thanks
 

Attachments

You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
P GSPRs / Clinical Evaluation EU Medical Device Regulations 2
P IDEs and Clinical Investigators - Advice About Records? Other US Medical Device Regulations 3
N Is there a need for clinical test of Class IIa products (for MDR)? EU Medical Device Regulations 2
silentmonkey Overall Benefit/Risk Analysis - Risk Management VS Clinical Evaluation ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 3
Q Summative Usability Evaluation Testing: prior or during Clinical Investigation? Human Factors and Ergonomics in Engineering 5
P Clinical Trial Requirement - No equivalent devices in the market CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 3
M Clinical Decision Support Software Question 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
S Regular updates of clinical evaluation report EU Medical Device Regulations 6
M Clinical Benefit of device that only aids in a process for managing or treating disease EU Medical Device Regulations 2
C EU MDR - Annex II 6.1 Pre-clinical and clinical data EU Medical Device Regulations 4
M Clinical Evaluation Benchmark vs. Equivalent EU Medical Device Regulations 2
D Classification of product for clinical trials EU Medical Device Regulations 14
D Deciding whether or not pre-market clinical investigation is required for low risk device EU Medical Device Regulations 5
S Australia TGA Clinical Evaluation Report (CER) Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
L Clinical research - Request from ANVISA ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 1
E Use of OQ cleared batch for stability and clinical study use ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 0
B Clinical Evaluation Expert Panels - MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 1
M Clinical Development Plan - Advice Requested EU Medical Device Regulations 11
T Clinical evaluation of a new medical device EU Medical Device Regulations 0
dgrainger Informational MDCG 2020:13 - Clinical evaluation assessment report template EU Medical Device Regulations 0
shimonv Minimum 60601 requirements for a clinical trial IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
S A clinical performance evaluation study with an IVD product as Investagional Use product - Clinical Monitor requirements 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
J Need for a cleanroom in the manufacture of a medical device for a clinical trial EU Medical Device Regulations 4
R Impact of changing manufacturer post clinical investigation CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 3
C MDCG 2020-06 Clinical evidence legacy devices EU Medical Device Regulations 3
R Clinical evaluation without clinical data - MDR Article 61(10) EU Medical Device Regulations 6
M Clinical Evaluation Plan vs. PMCF Plan EU Medical Device Regulations 21
S Selling Clinical Practice Advice Other US Medical Device Regulations 7
S FDA's E submitter - For clinical electronic thermometer Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 6
M Good Clinical Practice (GCP) - ISO 14155 vs. ICH Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 10
S Article 61 - MDR Clinical Investigation Requirement EU Medical Device Regulations 5
J Are DAM tools, Mobile application, clinical dashboard, etc. considered accessories to medical device or supportive functions? Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
M Can someone share a scrubbed version of Clinical Evaluation Plan (CEP) EU Medical Device Regulations 5
R Do Medical Device Complaints include Clinical Trials? Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 3
S EU MDR Annex XIV - Clinical Evaluation Plan - What do these methods mean? EU Medical Device Regulations 16
dgrainger Informational MHRA updated guidance: Clinical investigations of medical devices – guidance for manufacturers Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
vickyva Checklist for Clinical Investigation compliant to EU-MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 4
U Do we need clinical trial data for Class IIa medical device under MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 7
M Risk Classification For Supplier - Clinical Research Organisation (CRO) Supply Chain Security Management Systems 3
A Post-market clinical followup studies (PMCF) EU Medical Device Regulations 16
Ed Panek Adverse Event Clinical Trial using a 510K approved Device Other US Medical Device Regulations 6
S Clinical Evaluation - Is this an ISO 13485:2016 requirement? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
M Informational How to perform a clinical evaluation of medical devices – Part 2 – Level of clinical evidence and what sufficient clinical evidence means Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 9
M EU – Chemical Safety Report – CSR – REACH Authorisation decisions – Triton X-100 – Ortho-clinical-Use1 REACH and RoHS Conversations 0
M One clinical design: Russia and Europe Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 0
T Clinical trial - Medical device product not cleared (without FDA approval) in a drug trial Other US Medical Device Regulations 9
S Level of Clinical Evidence - MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 3
M Informational US FDA Draft Guidance – Clinical Decision Support Software Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
I Device modifications - Clinical sample size rationale EU Medical Device Regulations 5
M Informational MDCG 2019-9 Summary of safety and clinical performance A guide for manufacturers and notified bodies – August 2019 Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0

Similar threads

Top Bottom