datasheets.com EBN.com EDN.com EETimes.com Embedded.com PlanetAnalog.com TechOnline.com  
Events
UBM Tech
UBM Tech

News & Analysis

Comment


agk

2/28/2011 11:00 AM EST

FDA taking more time to approve is right i feel. These are life saving gadgets ...

More...



Streetrodder

2/24/2011 11:08 AM EST

I have to look at this from the other end of the spectrum. I'm a ...

More...

Medtech prognosis: Going digital, under stress

George Leopold, Rick Merritt

2/22/2011 9:49 AM EST

Not-so-soft(ware) side of the FDA

 

The Food and Drug Administration is developing new guidance documents for how it will regulate mobile devices and electronic health records. The work is part of the agency's continuing efforts to refine its focus on software.

 

The FDA considers any software program that tracks, diagnoses or treats a disease as a medical device, subject to all its regulations, said FDA software compliance expert Murray. As such, programs, including medical apps on smartphones, are subject to strict design controls. These are typically based on the IEC 62304 international standard, Murray said in a talk at the DesignMed conference.

John Murray

The controls apply both to in-house-developed code and software purchased from outside a company. Internal code must conform to a written plan that details how design requirements are documented, how design outputs conform to those requirements, and how the finished programs are verified and validated.

 

Even free open-source code requires documentation about where it came from and why it fit the design requirements. Like internal code, it is also subject to a risk analysis.

 

Engineers need a process for tracking design changes as well. That process, however, can have attributes that measure the safety impact of a change, so that every software alteration does not have to be tracked by quality systems.

 

Companies using automated electronic design control systems must ensure those programs conform to FDA regulations too, added Murray. The FDA has separate regulations to cover software in medical devices, automated production systems and computers used in clinical trials or electronic record-keeping.

 

"There are FDA regs on how to write FDA regs and guidance documents on how to write guidance documents," Murray quipped.

 

If it all sounds onerous, that’s because it is, medtech engineers said at DesignMed. Murray admitted the FDA can be like a foreign country with its own language. "You need to have at least one person in your company who understands that language," he said.

 

So far, the FDA has approved about three smartphone apps as medical devices, including one the proverbial doctor on a golf course could use to view data remotely from a hospital's patient monitoring system. The underlying handset or PC that runs a medical app is not considered a separate device that needs approval, but the limitations of the hardware must be a part of the software's risk analysis controls, Murray said.





Warren

2/22/2011 3:24 PM EST

Gee, I sure hope the following is not a surprise to the FDA: "In the final analysis, most executives are confident digital technology will drive new opportunities in medical electronics for many years to come."

Neither should the final sentence in that paragraph be a surprise: "They [medtech execs] are less sure whether those opportunities will be realized in the States."


Sign in to Reply



rick.merritt

2/22/2011 5:37 PM EST

@Warren: Any experiences with the FDA you care to share?

Sign in to Reply



goafrit

2/23/2011 7:40 PM EST

Wireless enabled medical devices is the future and that will have huge impact in the world. This will become the next big thing after the present fascinations with social media.

Sign in to Reply



Streetrodder

2/24/2011 11:08 AM EST

I have to look at this from the other end of the spectrum. I'm a Biomedical/Clinical Engineer in the VA. My peers and I are responsible for managing the systems after they are in use. Among other duties, am responsible for managing hazards involving medical equipment once it's deployed nationawide.

What I see is a lot of vendors jumping at the bit to dump devices into healthcare without considering useability, lifecycle management or responding to post-market issues. I also see a lot of devices that are being promoted as alarm replacement technologies that aren't reliable enough to do so.

The user community would be happy to work with the manufacturers to limit this. We're tired of coming in to fix the devastation left behind after the latest whiz-bang technology doesn't live up to its hype.

Paul Sherman

Sign in to Reply



agk

2/28/2011 11:00 AM EST

FDA taking more time to approve is right i feel. These are life saving gadgets and to be tested for its reliable functionality without any harm to the people who will use it.FDA can employ more number of experienced people to speed up this process of approving so that more and more advanced gadgets will come faster to extend people's lives

Sign in to Reply



Please sign in to post comment

Navigate to related information

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)