Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Unlike user facilities, manufacturers are directly under the jurisdiction of FDA and rely on device users to report adverse events in a timely manner to help them comply with their strict regulatory requirements. Therefore, an effective postmarket surveillance program is directly dependent on the active participation of health care professionals. However, the limitations of the spontaneous reporting system challenge the agency's and manufacturers' efforts to promptly identify, quantitate, and understand new risks associated with marketed products. Underreporting and lack of quality of information make it extremely difficult for FDA and manufacturers to determine the magnitude of the problem as well as recognize safety trends. The MedSun pilot program was developed in response to the recognition that FDA needed to augment the reporting of device-related adverse events by health care facilities. MedSun has been favorably received by participating user facilities as well as being an extremely valuable resource in helping to promote patient safety

Keywords

MedSun Spontaneous reporting Medical device

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Small

. Medical device-associated safety and risk: surveillance and stratagems. Editorial. JAMA. 2004:367:370.

Weick-Brady

Lazerow

. Medical devices: promoting a safe migration into the home. Home Healthcare Nurse. 2006;24:298–304. Available at: http://www.nursingcenter.com/library/JournalArticle.asp?Article_ID=644230. Accessed September 26, 2007.

Field

Tilson

. Safe Medical Devices for Children. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2005.

White

Weick-Brady

. Improving patient care by reporting problems with medical devices. MEDWATCH continuing education article. Rockville, MD: Food and Drug Administration, September 1997. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/articles/mdr/mdr.pdf. Accessed September 2, 2007.

Medical device reporting for manufacturers. In: Selected Regulations and Guidance for Medical Device Studies. Code of Federal Regulations. Clinical Research Resources. 2004:5–6.

Thomas website. H.R. 3580. Available at: http://www.thomas.gov/cgibin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.03580. Accessed March 2, 2008.

US Food and Drug Administration. The clinical impact of adverse event reporting: postmarketing reporting of adverse events. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/articles/medcont/postrep.htm. Accessed September 12, 2007.

Lasagna

. Discovering adverse drug reactions. JAMA. 1983;249:2224–2225.

American Medical Association. Reporting adverse drug and medical device events: report of the AMA's council on ethical and judicial affairs. Food Drug Law J. 1994;49:359.

10.

Gross

Witten

Uldriks

. Medical device regulation in the USA. In: Brown

Bright

Tavris

, eds. Medical Device Epidemiology and Surveillance. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2007:10.

11.

Califf

Kramer

O'Shea

Peterson

. Part I: identifying holes in the safety net. Am Heart J. 2004;147:977–984.

12.

Bright

. Surveillance of adverse medical device events. In: Brown

Bright

Tavris

, eds. Medical Device Epidemiology and Surveillance. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2007:44.

13.

Baim

Mehran

Kereiakes

Post market approval surveillance for drug-eluting coronary stents: a comprehensive approach. Circ J. 2006;113:894.

14.

US Food and Drug Administration. Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. Statement by Joseph A. Levitt. May 27, 1999. Available at: http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/∼dms/staers.html. Accessed September 12, 2007.

15.

Medical device problem reporting for the betterment of healthcare. ECRI Institute's Medical Device Safety Reports. Health Devices. 1998;28(8): 277–292. Available at: http://www.mdsr.ecri.org/summary/detail.aspx. Accessed September 10, 2007.

16.

Greenfield

. Perspective from an academic on postmarket sureveillance. In: Brown

Bright

Tavris

, eds. Medical Device Epidemiology and Surveillance. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2007:160.

17.

Gardner

Flack

. Designing a medical device surveillance network: report to Congress. 1999. Available at: www.fda.gov/cdrh/postsurv/medsun.html. Accessed October 25, 2007.

18.

CDRH. Report of the postmarket transformation leadership team: strengthening FDA's postmarket program for medical devices. November 2006. Available at: www.fda.gov/cdrh/postmarket/mdpi-report-1106.html. Accessed November 09, 2006.

19.

Bren

. Ensuring the Safety of Medical Devices. FDA Consumer Magazine. May-June 2006. Available at: www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2006/306_devices.html. Accessed January 15, 2007.

20.

Bright

Flack

Gardner

. The Medical Product Surveillance Network (MedSun). In: Brown

Bright

Tavris

, eds. Medical Device Epidemiology and Surveillance. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2007:69.

21.

Flack

Reed

Crowley

Gardner

. Identifying, understanding, and communicating medical device use errors: observations from an FDA pilot program. Adv Patient Safety. 3:223–233. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/downloads/pub/advances/vol3/Flack.pdf. Accessed October 20, 2007.

22.

MedSun Participant website. Available at: https://www.medsun.net/participants/. Accessed January 2005.

23.

Medical Product Surveillance Network. Frequently asked questions. Available at: https://www.medsun.net/faq.asp. Accessed December 14, 2007.

Issues with Medical Device Spontaneous Reporting and Improvements through MedSun

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References