Based on the observation summary report from an endoscopy support specialist (ess), there were some reprocessing deviations observed during the on-site visit, and they are as follows: the user facility staff was not performing aspiration during manual cleaning.Customer was not using the (maj-855) auxiliary water tubes to flush the auxiliary channel and the facility did not have a suction machine.The ess reviewed leak testing, manual cleaning and storage for this in-service and explained the process for aspirating detergent solution and using the maj-855 to flush the auxiliary channel.Staff understood the process.Notified the customer to purchase a suction machine, mh-856 suction cleaning adapters, and maj-855 auxiliary water tubes and additional units of mh-946 injection tubes, and mh-944 channel plugs.The ess provided a reprocessing in-service or reprocessing training to the user facility staff.The ess provided the user facility staff reprocessing training materials for their reference.
|
This supplemental report is being submitted to provide the results of the legal manufacturer's final investigation.Corrected fields: d9 and e3.Additional information added to fields h3 and h6.A review of the device history record found no deviations that could have caused or contributed to the reported issue.It has been over 9 years since the subject device was manufactured.The device was not returned to olympus for inspection, and the customer's allegation was not confirmed.Based on the results of the investigation, it is likely that there was a difference in recognition on device handling or reprocessing steps between olympus recommendation and the user.Olympus expert staff has already conducted training on proper reprocessing for the user.The event can be detected/prevented by following the instructions for use: preventive measure is described in ifu: gif/cf/pcf-190 series reprocessing manual chapter 5 reprocessing the endoscope.Olympus will continue to monitor field performance for this device.
|