Regulatory Open Forum

 View Only
  • 1.  technical file review (CE)

    Posted 10-Aug-2011 11:37

    Has anyone had a technical file review as a result of the Directive's new sampling requirement? I just received an email that someone from our registrar BSI, wants to schedule a full day on site for this.

    thanks,
    Christie Zydyk
    Chief RA/QA Officer
    Quality Electrodynamics
    Mayfield Village OH
    -------------------------------------------


  • 2.  RE:technical file review (CE)

    Posted 11-Aug-2011 08:29
    Yes - Notified Bodies are either scheduling additional time on site or requesting Technical Files to be submitted for off site review, prior to the on site audits.  We are seeing increased focus on (1)Clinical Evaluation Reports, (2) Risk Analysis and (3) Post Market Surveillance and verifying that completed in accordance with MDD, guidance documents and standards, as applicable for the area.    

    Best of Luck,
    -------------------------------------------
    Julie Powell
    Emergo Group
    Delton MI
    United States
    -------------------------------------------








  • 3.  RE:technical file review (CE)

    Posted 11-Aug-2011 11:02

    Yes, UL UK used to follow this method of review for very many years now. They were requsting for TCF to be given to them for off-site review and followed by a MDD audit (if needed) at site.
    -------------------------------------------
    Rajaram Balasubramanian RAC
    Regulatory Affairs Leader
    Karnataka
    India
    -------------------------------------------








  • 4.  RE:technical file review (CE)

    Posted 12-Aug-2011 19:27


    -------------------------------------------
    Andre von Muller
    Consultant, Regulatory Affairs, FDA, Manufacturing
    Carefusion
    Yorba Linda CA
    United States
    -------------------------------------------
    YES - Additionally BSI will look for the following: (applicable to Technical Files)
    1.- Compliance with MEDDEV 2.7.1, Rev. 3 (or latest) Guidance on Medical Devices,
    2.- Compliance with amendment M5 of the MDD Council Directive 93/42/EEC (this is for the entire Technical File),
    3.- Clinical evaluations need to have a section outlining the qualifications of the author.
    NOTE:  Usually a brief bios or CV (curriculum vitae) of the author is enough. If the Scientific Literature evaluation or Clinical Review is not performed by a Clinician (who are actually the most qualified personnel to write or perform this type of evaluation), then it helps to have the clinical evaluation (a.k.a. White Paper) countersigned by a Clinician or someone that has the qualifications to write a clinical Evaluation. 
    NOTE: Make sure your claims or clinical results or summaries are also captured in your ER (Essential Requirements) checklist. Otherwise there is a gap or inconsistency of results presented.

    A couple of months ago, we had a three-day audit only on Technical Files (a.k.a. Dossiers), and ended up with a couple of minor findings (such as lack of CV or qualifications of the author who performed th Clinical Evaluation), and lack of a rationale for NOT using the Machine Directive 2006-42-EC, and also for not using Personal Protective Equipment Directive 89-686-EEC. (BSI Checklist)
     
    Hope this helps




  • 5.  RE:technical file review (CE)

    Posted 11-Aug-2011 08:38


    -------------------------------------------
    Lori Burns RAC
    Senior Regulatory Affairs Specialist
    Kensey Nash Corporation
    Exton PA
    United States
    -------------------------------------------
    Yes, I participated in a review. The reviewer verified that the Declaration of Conformity states that we met the requirements of 2007/47/EC. The reviewer focused on amendment 5 of the MDD, particularly labeling and the Clinical Evaluation. The reviewer reviewed the Essential Requirements Checklist. We had to demonstrate post market surveillance.  The reviewer will spend the time examining the documentation of the technical file.