The reported device, intended for use in treatment, was not returned to the designated complaint unit for independent evaluation, thus visual inspection and functional testing could not be performed.A review of the device history records showed there were no indications to suggest that the product did not meet manufacturing specification or would not be able to perform as intended.A complaint history review concluded this was a repeat issue.A relationship, if any, between the subject device and the reported event could not be determined.Please refer to the instructions for use for recommendations on proper use of the device and potential troubleshooting methods to prevent future reoccurrence of the reported event.No containment or corrective actions are recommended at this time.If the product associated with this event is returned at a future date, this evaluation will be reopened for investigation.
|
H10: internal complaint reference case-(b)(4).H3, h6: the reported device was received for evaluation.Visual inspection of the returned device did not identify any issues.The reported malfunction was not duplicated during functional testing.A review of device records showed there were no indications to suggest that the product did not meet manufacturing specifications upon release for distribution.A complaint history review found similar reported events.A risk management review found that the reported failure and/or harm was documented appropriately, and there were no indications to suggest the anticipated risk is not adequate.The root cause was not determined since the reported malfunction could not be duplicated during the product evaluation process.Factors that can contribute to the reported event include a failure of a concomitant device.No containment or corrective actions are recommended at this time.
|