SNITEM & Philips France vs. Health Minister: the ECJ defines the conditions under which software for assistance to the medical prescription can be qualified medical device within the meaning of the Directive.
The agency has released a draft guidance outlining its policy for accepting data from foreign clinical studies.
The most important part to remember about this recommendation document for unannounced audits is that it not only applies to medical device manufacturers, but also significantly includes their suppliers and subcontractors.
Unannounced notified body audits are nothing new. Unfortunately, because of one really bad apple in the industry and a perception of the regulatory environment in the EU lacking teeth, the Commission has come up with an unrealistic and expensive solution for industry.
What’s changing in the medical devices and in vitro diagnostic regulatory landscape in the European Union, and how can you effectively navigate these changes? This article offers an overview.
Well (deep subject, the doctor knows), I know many of the readers were wondering about Dr. D’s next series. The doctor really wanted to make this next series an enjoyable surprise. That being said, surprise, surprise, surprise (thank you Gomer Pyle USMC); the next series of Dr. D’s articles will be focused on complying with MHLW Ministerial Ordinance Number 169.
During the course of the last eight months, Dr. D has had the opportunity to dive into 98/79/EC, the European In-Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device Directive while extracting salient elements in the hope of providing Devine Guidance for the readers. This journey has now come to an end.
Dr. D has just one takeaway from this edition of DG; “Just comply baby!” It does not get any easier than that, well maybe not that easy.
The relationship between the notified body and the device manufacturer is not unlike a marriage. If a positive relationship is garnered and sustained, life is beautiful. If the relationship sours, then divorce is inevitable; and then the phrase is; “I want my CE mark back, now!”
This week’s guidance for IVDD Annex VII reiterates a device manufacturer’s commitment to supplying a device capable of providing accurate and repeatable results and ongoing compliance with the Directive.