This complaint claims that the user attempted to "flush" the drain through the port "left of the blue suction valve." two possible meanings are being considered for this, depending on how the user may have the drain oriented when describing the location of the "port." the user did not return the drain or provide pictures.Multiple attempts were made to acquire additional information from the complainant, but no response was received.They may mean they are attempting to empty the drain through the pprv, which is not the intended purpose of the pprv.The pprv (positive pressure release valve) is intended to allow fluid to exit the drain when the drain fills or has positive pressure.This allows the drain to continue to function until it can be replaced.The ifu instructs the user to replace the drain if it becomes full, so the user should not be attempting to empty it.If they pour fluid through the pprv, it is possible for it to congeal in the vent, clogging it and preventing any more fluid from being able to pass through.They may also mean that they depressed the mvv to attempt to relieve the negative pressure in the drain and lower the height of the water seal column and the spring mechanism became stuck.Because it is not clear which scenario the user is describing and they did not provide any further information when asked, a definite root-cause cannot be determined.The root-cause of this complaint is impossible to define.A dhr review was completed which found no anomalies in the manufacturing process.No ncrs involving this lot were identified.The incoming inspection record for the drain subassembly used in this device was reviewed and no anomalies were identified.Relevant manufacturing procedures and device/part specifications were reviewed and no changes or inadequacies were identified which would likely contribute to this complaint.No evidence was found to suggest manufacturing was the cause of this complaint.The ifu provides adequate instructions for the setup and use of the device and contains all the information required to avoid this failure.Because the device was not returned and no images or any other evidence of the incident was provided, this complaint cannot be confirmed.A device nonconformity cannot be confirmed with the provided information or with the information reviewed in this investigation.A definite root-cause cannot be determined because it is not clear exactly what failure occurred.The root-cause for this complaint is impossible to define.The hazardous situation/harm is addressed in the harm hazards analysis document which assigns it a severity level of 1.This was determined to be appropriate based on the harm that was reported in the complaint.Complaint trending concluded that the actual occurrence level did not exceed the anticipated occurrence level.H3 other text : device not returned.
|