Arjohuntleigh received customer complaint for sara stedy active lift.It was reported that during transfer from bed to the sara stedy, the patient care technician was loading patient onto device.The patient's caregiver stepped in and reached over safety bar to help the resident while standing.At this moment sara stedy came off the ground in the front and landed on the patient care technician's foot.As a result, their foot was injured.
|
(b)(4).An investigation was carried out into this complaint.Arjohuntleigh received customer complaint where it was reported that the incident occurred during transfer from seated position at the edge of the bed - to chair.There were two people assisting the transfer.The patient care technician (pct) was loading patient onto sara stedy.At the same time the patient's caregiver stepped in to help while standing in front of the device and reached over safety bar to lift patient up by gait belt.Sara stedy came off the ground in the front and landed on patient care technician's foot.In effect, the patient care technician received a minor injury: bruised toe.After review of reportable complaints for sara stedy and stedy (which has very similar construction), descriptions of two of them suggest relation to events where the person is standing on the device and leaning, causing it to tip or almost tip.Please note that arjohuntleigh manufactured about 9000 stedy and 21000 sara stedy to date.Compared to the amount of sold devices and in comparison to their daily use, amount of reportable complaints with this failure mode is considered to be very low.From the gathered information, and also confirmed by the customer, it can be read that sara stedy tipped most likely because it was not operated according to the instruction for use (ifu), which was delivered with the device.The stability of the device depends on a variety of factors.However, there are mainly four factors that may be considered, which are the utilization of the device, the environment of use, the stability inherent to the design of the device and the stability inherent to the condition of the device at the time of use.The three last ones are not considered to have contributed to the outcome of the event, since the device was not being maneuvered when the event occurred and the sara stedy meets the static stability requirements of iso 10535:2006.There was no indication of technical device malfunction.However, the position of the caregiver is considered to have contributed to the instability, as the caregiver was leaning forward over the crossbar while helping the patient to stand up.This way of handling is not consistent with the ifu, which clearly states how this type of transfer should be carried out.Since there is no need for a caregiver to step into the sara stedy and lean forward in order to perform a patient transfer, since no problems were found with the floor lift, it is considered the lift was not being used as per its instructions for use.If sara stedy's handling procedures were followed in accordance to instruction for use, there would be no patient or caregiver at risk.We find this complaint to be reportable to the competent authorities in abundance of caution, due to the risk of tipping for the caregiver and risk of body trapping for the patient care technician.There was no indication of product malfunction.It was being used for patient handling and likely due to use error contributed to the outcome of the event.
|