There was no death or device malfunction associated with the inappropriate defibrillation event.Device evaluation summary: electrode belt sn (b)(4) was returned and evaluated at zoll manufacturing.Monitor sn (b)(4) was returned and evaluated at the distributor, in accordance with procedures recommended by zoll manufacturing corporation.The evaluation included review of downloaded software flag files on the day of the event and incoming functional testing.The review of the software flags consisted of an analysis of the downloaded data to identify any fault flags or unusual patterns of software flags.The software flag files did not suggest a device malfunction that would contribute to the inappropriate treatment.Download fault flags were detected, but downloading is a secondary function of the device and does not prevent the device from detecting and treating a patient.Belt gel fault flags were also detected.Upon evaluation, the front therapy electrode did not deploy gel.The lack of gel deployment did not cause or contribute to the inappropriate treatment event.The impedance of the treatment shocks was well within the normal range (82 and 65 ohms, respectively).There is no indication that the lack of gel deployment from the front therapy electrode resulted in an injury.The belt is currently under engineering investigation to determine the cause of the lack of gel deployment.Device manufacture date monitor: sn (b)(4): 12/18/2012 reuse.Electrode belt: sn (b)(4): 06/17/2011 reuse.The investigation into the event concludes that there was no device malfunction.A cause and effect analysis was conducted using all of the available information which includes the incident report, device evaluation, software flag files, and ecg strips.The primary cause of the inappropriate shock was improper response button use by the patient during the false detection.The response buttons were pressed, but not prior to treatment delivery.The ecg analysis, conducted by trained ecg technicians, identified the primary cause of the false detection was rapid atrial flutter.Inappropriate defibrillations are an anticipated risk associated with the use of the lifevest.Patients are instructed through alarms, voice messages, ifu, and training to press the response buttons to prevent an inappropriate defibrillation.The current commercial inappropriate defibrillation rate is consistent with the observed rate during the pivotal clinical trial g960083 (0.69% per patient-month with 90% confidence).A summary of the safety and effectiveness data (ssed), including the inappropriate defibrillation safety objective supporting fda's approval of the lifevest, can be found at http://www.Accessdata.Fda.Gov/cdrh_docs/pdf/p010030b.Pdf.The lifevest detection algorithm complies with iec 60601-2-4 performance requirements for sensitivity and specificity.
|