WANTED: Medical Device Quality & Regulatory

Contact me if this is you. Specifically, I’m interested in connecting with you if you have 5+ years experience with quality systems, regulatory submissions (US and OUS), supplier audits, and internal auditing.

Canadian Licence Process for Medical Devices – A Step by Step Example

Thanks again to Rob Packard for providing another guest post. Rob is a Regulatory Affairs and Quality Management System expert whose specialty is helping companies with regulatory submission of a Design Dossiers for CE Marking of high-risk Class III medical devices. You can read more of Rob’s work at QC is Dead and RA Review blogs. 

Thank you for reading my previous posting on Creo Quality, “FDA 510(k) or CE Marking?” from July 10th. As an encore performance, I am writing this posting to explain the process for obtaining a Canadian Medical Device License. Why?

Because Canada is easier to obtain approval from than the US FDA or European Notified Bodies.

For my example, I have chosen to invent a client for Jon to help.

Jon just got a call from the makers of Krazy Glue®. They want to start selling their products as medical devices. Fortunately for them, companies have been selling cyanoacrylate (e.g. – Krazy Glue®) as a medical device for years. Therefore, Jon’s client needs to decide if they want to sell the product as: 1) a liquid bandage, 2) a topical adhesive to replace sutures, or 3) a vascular repair device for use inside the body during surgery. Jon’s client indicates that they want to sell cyanoacrylate as a medical device all over the world. Therefore, Jon does a little homework and decides that a “topical adhesive” application will give his client the higher margins of a medical device for prescription use, but it will also avoid the costly pre-market approval (PMA) process at the FDA. Jon also decides to recommend that his client try a pilot launch in Canada first to evaluate their new packaging ideas on a smaller market than the USA or Europe.

My first job in Regulatory Affairs taught me the most valuable lesson of all: “Always go back to the source.” In this case, Jon doesn’t want to rely only this posting for his information on how to get a Medical Device License in Canada. He needs to start with the Regulations. The “helpful links” (http://13485cert.com/helpful-links/) page of my website tells you how to find the Canadian Medical Device Regulations (CMDR), but for those of you that just don’t want to work that hard, here’s the direct link: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/SOR-98-282.pdf. The Regulations were most recently updated on June 27, 2012. If you want to know what the difference is between the current version and the previous version, I wrote an entire blog posting on just that topic (http://13485cert.com/did-canada-forget-about-document-control/). The posting is 762 words long, but the two-word answer is: “Not much.”

Now that Jon has the single greatest cure for insomnia, he skips ahead to the bottom of page 54. Rule 4 states that “all non-invasive devices that are intended to come into contact with injured skin are classified as Class 2.” This is the applicable rule for this device, but how does Jon know?

Jon identified a competing product for sale in the US and Canada so that he could verify the classification as Class II. In this case, the competing product was “Surgiseal.” Jon checked the establishment listing database at the US FDA, and for Canada Jon reviewed the license information shown below.

Licence No.: 88330

Type: Single Device
Device Class: 2
First Issue Date: 2012-02-27
Licence Name: SURGISEAL TOPICAL SKIN ADHESIVE

 

Device Details
Device Section Identifier Section
First Issue Date Device Name First Issue Date Device Identifier
2012-02-27 SURGISEAL, TOPICAL SKIN ADHESIVE 2012-02-27 SS-035T

 

Now that Jon has verified this is a Class 2 device in Canada, Jon needs to review the Canadian Licensing Process. In the  CMDR, starting on page 16 (Section 32), Jon reviews the process of applying for a Medical Device License. He also reviews the Guidance Document for “How to complete a new medical device license application.” The location of the Health Canada Guidance Document is: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/md-im/applic-demande/guide-ld/md_gd_licapp_im_ld_demhom-eng.php. Fortunately, this is a Class II device and the requirements are primarily to complete the application form and to sign attestations regarding compliance with the safety and effectiveness requirements (Section 10-20 of the CMDR) and compliance with the labeling requirements (Section 21-23 of the CMDR). The application form has a new section requiring information about phthalate content of the device in the application. However, this tissue adhesive would only have phthalates if it was contained in the packaging.

After Jon’s review, he meets with the client to explain the next steps of the process:

1. The client needs to upgrade their existing ISO 9001:2008 Quality Management Certificate to an ISO 13485:2003 Certificate with CMDCAS. “CMDCAS” is the Canadian Medical Device Conformity Assessment System. The Quality System Auditor from the registrar will look for additional requirements specific to the CMDR, but all of these requirements are identified in GD210—another guidance document from Health Canada. This will only require a one-day external audit to upgrade the scope of the current certification.

2. Jon and the client need to revise the labeling to meet the requirements for Sections 21-23 of the CMDR. Since this product will be used by Medial Professionals, rather than an over-the-counter product, the labeling requirements are similar to Europe and the US. The most important thing to do will be to implement the use of appropriate symbols found in ISO 15223:2012—an Internal Standard for Labeling and Symbols.

3. The client will need Jon to conduct an internal audit to the CMDR requirements prior to the certification upgrade audit.

4. Finally, once the new Quality System Certificate is received Jon and the client can complete the application and submit the application with a copy of the new certificate.

In all, Jon estimates that his client can complete this process in less than 60 days. When the client gets an upgrade quotation from their registrar, the earliest date available is in 10 weeks, but their annual surveillance audit is already scheduled for 13 weeks. Therefore, the client decides to combine the two audits to save money on the travel costs and to give themselves a little more time to prepare.

Not all applications are this easy. For higher risk devices (i.e. – Class 3 and 4), summary technical documentation (STED) must be submitted in paper and electronically. Canada provides guidance documents for this, and there is a Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF) document that explains how to prepare these documents. Depending upon the Classification and complexity of the device being submitted, this documentation can take weeks or months to prepare. The documentation matches the requirements for Technical Files required by Europe for CE Marking and 510(k) submissions required by the US FDA. However, the documentation can be prepared for most devices in less than 6 months—including biocompatibility testing and sterilization validation. This can also be done in parallel with obtaining ISO 13485:2003 certification. The only item that might require longer is if Clinical Studies are required—which is only required for high-risk devices or novel devices that are dissimilar from other devices already on the market.

Quality & Regulatory Resources In High Demand for Medical Device Industry

The trend recently has involved at least one phone call or email per week from a medical device company requesting help–either full-time or consulting–in the areas of quality and regulatory. And the requests are coming from all types of medical device companies.

As a consulting firm providing solutions in quality and regulatory, I’m a little excited about this trend. But this also has me a little concerned, mainly because I want to understand why the sudden surge.

Are companies suddenly struggling with FDA regulations and ISO requirements? Are companies expanding into new markets requiring expertise from seasoned experts? Are companies losing resources? I honestly don’t know the answers. But I can tell you it has been difficult to find people to fill the requests.

If you have quality and/or regulatory experience or know someone who does, please contact us: 765 315 2736, info@creoquality.com.

Medical Device Company Needs Regulatory / Quality Resource

I’m working with a disposable medical device company based in central Indiana who is in need of at least one full-time resource in regulatory affairs / quality assurance. The ideal candidate should have at least 5 years medical device experience with a primary emphasis on regulatory, preferably U.S. and outside U.S. (including EU, Canada, South America).

If you or someone you know is interested, please contact me directly at 765 315 2736 or via email.

October 22 – 26, 2011 – RAPS Conference

This year’s RAPS conference takes place October 22 – 26 in Indianapolis.

New FDA Draft Guidance: When to File 510(k)

We’re working with a medical device company now that has several products that received market clearance via 510(k). Many of these products have incurred changes since being launched. The company has done a good job of reviewing FDA 510(k) decision trees to determine whether another submission is required. However, sometimes product changes fall into a gray area where it’s not entirely clear whether a new 510(k) submission is required.

FDA recognizes that these decisions are not always black and white and has drafted a new guidance document for when to file a 510(k). Below are some links about this topic:

Reforming the 510(k) process: the FDA’s latest guidance

FDA Issues Draft Guidance, “510(k) Device Modifications: Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Change to an Existing Device”

Do You Need New 510(k) Submission? – FDA Clarifies

FDA Provides Draft Guidance for 510(k) Premarket Submission

August 30, 2011 – RAPS Indiana Chapter Kickoff

30 August 2011
4:00–7:00 pm
Indiana University Emerging Technology Center
Indianapolis

The Regulatory Affairs Professionals Society (RAPS) is pleased to announce the creation of the RAPS Indiana Chapter! RAPS Chapters are intended to deliver local networking and professional development opportunities for regulatory and related professionals within an identified region. The first step toward delivering that programming is to identify the needs of the constituents in the Indiana region.
You are cordially invited to attend the inaugural meeting to interact with other regulatory professionals from your area and to provide input about the types of local programming that would be most beneficial to you and your colleagues. During this program, participants will break out into groups to classify appropriate topics for future events and to identify other opportunities to engage regulatory professionals. Your input will be invaluable to us as we begin scheduling programs.
During this event, a raffle will be held for a complimentary registration to 2011 RAPS: The Regulatory Convergence, 22-26 October at the Indiana Convention Center. We hope to see you there!
Light refreshments will be available for all meeting participants, and we encourage you to come join us as we plan future activities of the RAPS Indiana Chapter.
Register today.

RAPS members: $15
Nonmembers: $25

How Do You Explain Regulatory Compliance?

When I was writing the last blog post for Building a Business Case, I really struggled with how to emphasize the importance of understanding regulatory and certification requirements ahead of time so that you could design your product around any codes or standards you need to meet.  Afterwards, I came across “Designing for Regulatory Compliance”.  It really goes into detail on the subject and explains how essential this concept is.

“Let’s start by understanding the goals of the regulatory processes. In general, they exist to ensure that safe and effective products are delivered into the market place with appropriate risk-benefit ratios. Every manufacturer, designer, regulatory professional, medical practitioner, and consumer has this as a common goal. However, if this is the case, why are there continually issues?  The issues originate in the way regulatory compliance is treated during the development process. It is often seen as an afterthought or a necessary evil to be tested for and sometimes gamed at the end of the process when negative regulatory feedback is very frustrating and expensive. Even one request for additional information can be devastating to a company’s plans and financial well-being. Funding for start-ups and small companies is often tied to regulatory milestones.

So what can you do? With existing ‘design for …’ processes, teams consist of the stakeholders who ensure successful execution of the plans. Similarly, companies can incorporate regulatory affairs professionals (or those with extensive regulatory experience) directly into their design teams to ensure that the regulatory concerns and requirements are addressed in planning and subsequent design phases. This approach encourages the team members to use their experience and expertise to design products and test programs that will allow the creation of regulatory-ready products.

Design for regulatory is a valuable concept, regardless of future changes to agency requirements or processes. Other ‘design for…’ paradigms have shown that up-front, early consideration of tasks that are usually performed at the end of the product development process reduces time to market and costs associated with redesign.
The development of a solid regulatory strategy and the incorporation of regulatory resources into the design process will ensure fewer surprises and allow for more efficient and potentially easier FDA submissions. This paradigm can also yield better competitive information and product positioning and potentially create a competitive advantage in the marketplace.”

Mr. Saltzstein, being an actual product designer, explains the process much better than I could ever hope to.

CQ Will Revolutionize Design Control Process

In 2011, Creo Quality will revolutionize medical device design control process. I don’t want to let the cat out of the bag too much. But we believe this product will help medical device companies improve efficiency and regulatory compliance.

If you have some thoughts on the topic of design controls, leave me a comment or send a message to info@creoquality.com. If you are interested in testing the product when a prototype is ready, let us know.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Regulatory & Quality Services In Demand

During the past few months, we have been in discussions with a half a dozen  or so companies–most early stage–all seeking similar advice. These companies need advice and recommendations on regulatory strategies. What do they need to do to put together FDA submissions? And can Creo Quality help?

Throughout the short history of our business, we’ve found this to be a consistent trend. Of course, it makes perfect sense. Entrepreneurs and inventors trying to develop medical devices need to obtain regulatory clearances before bringing products to market. Entrepreneurs and inventors typically have little to no knowledge of regulatory requirements. Creo Quality does.

I recently came across an article in medtechinsider about this very topic. The article references the Global Life Science Hiring Index report from ZRG Partners. The report states “Regulatory, Quality and Clinical roles were the most in demand hiring roles in the Q2 index with 27.2% of all opportunities in this functional bucket. It appears there is a fight for talent breaking out, with 63% of the opportunities in Regulatory, Quality and Clinical coming from the Outsourcing and Service Sector . . .”

Enhanced by Zemanta

510(k) Clearances Are Harder To Get Now

A couple of Indianapolis-based medical device firms recently received FDA 510(k) clearances for their new products. One clearance took 250+ days. The other took around 100 days. One had a clearly defined predicate device. The other leveraged several predicates but did not have a single, clear device for comparison. I realize this is a data set of 2, but the message I interpret is this: Without a clear predicate, except lengthy 510(k) reviews with lots of questions–and hope you are able to receive clearance.

A blog post from Anson Group goes more into this topic. Here is an excerpt:

Also, currently, several predicates can be used to create a substantial equivalence argument for one device. This practice is now under scrutiny as the Agency believes that it may limit the number of predicates to a single device, which must be within the same device panel as the device seeking clearance.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

June 14-15, 2010 – Overview Of FDA Regulatory Compliance For Med Devices

Overview Of FDA Regulatory Compliance For Medical Devices

Who Should Attend
This course was developed for those who are involved with ensuring regulatory compliance for medical devices.  Typical attendees include those in:

  • Manufacturing
  • Regulatory Affairs
  • Product Design
  • Research and Development
  • Quality Assurance & Control
  • Development and Preparation of Submission Material
  • Laboratory Operations

This course is designed for individuals who require in-depth knowledge of regulatory affairs and compliance issues.  The course content is continually updated by our expert Course Directors.  When delivered as an in-house program, this course is fully customizable to meet the specific needs of an organization, department or employees functional responsibility.

Learning Objectives

This course is specifically focused on the law, regulations and policies set down by the FDA for the manufacture of medical devices.  It will provide each attendee with the background and knowledge necessary to understand the organization, structure and role of the FDA as it relates to pre-marketing approval processes and compliance issues for medical devices.  The course content is designed to provide an in-depth understanding of the paths to obtaining agency approval, how the FDA performs inspections, the type of information they are looking to see in place and the variety of outcomes from each inspection.  The course also covers the remedies available to satisfy inspectors that manufacturing processes are fully in compliance with quality system requirements.

Get more info.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

June 16, 2010 – St. Vincent Health’s 6th Annual Research Symposium

St. Vincent Health’s 6th Annual Research Symposium is scheduled for June 16, 2010 in Indianapolis.  As part of the Symposium we will hold our annual research abstract presentation and competition. Please plan to attend the Symposium.  Save the date and look for further details and registration information in the coming weeks.

View 2009′s Symposium Presentations

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

May 24-25, 2010 – Overview of FDA Regulatory Compliance For Med Devices

Overview Of FDA Regulatory Compliance For Medical Devices

Who Should Attend
This course was developed for those who are involved with ensuring regulatory compliance for medical devices.  Typical attendees include those in:

  • Manufacturing
  • Regulatory Affairs
  • Product Design
  • Research and Development
  • Quality Assurance & Control
  • Development and Preparation of Submission Material
  • Laboratory Operations

This course is designed for individuals who require in-depth knowledge of regulatory affairs and compliance issues.  The course content is continually updated by our expert Course Directors.  When delivered as an in-house program, this course is fully customizable to meet the specific needs of an organization, department or employees functional responsibility.

Learning Objectives

This course is specifically focused on the law, regulations and policies set down by the FDA for the manufacture of medical devices.  It will provide each attendee with the background and knowledge necessary to understand the organization, structure and role of the FDA as it relates to pre-marketing approval processes and compliance issues for medical devices.  The course content is designed to provide an in-depth understanding of the paths to obtaining agency approval, how the FDA performs inspections, the type of information they are looking to see in place and the variety of outcomes from each inspection.  The course also covers the remedies available to satisfy inspectors that manufacturing processes are fully in compliance with quality system requirements.

Get more info.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

April 13-14, 2010 – Biocompatibility of Medical Devices Certification Course

Biocompatibility of Medical Devices:
Two Day Certification Course

February 16 & 17 ~ San Diego, CA
April 13 & 14 ~ New Orleans, LA

This course is geared toward those who need to have a working knowledge of biocompatibility. The objective of the course is to teach participants how to use standards to establish a biological safety evaluation plan. Participants also learn how to document and implement their plan. Use of risk assessment is covered and participants will practice evaluating biological risk. Both days are structured to be hands-on. Participants who attend and complete all exercises will be certified as a biological safety specialist.

Who Should Attend?
-  Regulatory Affairs and Quality Assurance Professionals
-  Research, Design and Manufacturing Engineers
-  Product Managers
-  Laboratory Managers
-  Process Development and System Engineers
-  Biological Safety Analysts
-  Anyone interested in learning more about meeting the test requirements of regulatory bodies in
world markets
-  Those needing continuing education for RAPS Certification

San Diego, CA Session: Register by January 15 and receive a $200 discount! Attend this 2-day course for only $900. After January 15 the registration price will be $1100. Space is limited.

New Orleans, LA Session: Register by March 12 and receive a $200 discount! Attend this 2-day course for only $900. After March 12 the registration price will be $1100. Space is limited. Register today!

Register 3 or more attendees at the same company during early registration to receive a further discount. Each registrant will receive an additional $100 off for a total registration fee of $800.00 per person.

Contact Anne Urfer at 419.662.4498 or email events@namsa.com.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]