A device history record review could not be performed because a lot number was not received with the complaint.Since a lot number was not provided, a date of manufacture could not be determined.As part of our manufacturing process, all device history records are reviewed and approved by quality, prior to release of product.A sample was not received for the investigation.Because a sample was not returned, we were unable to perform a follow-up investigation to include functional and visual evaluations to confirm the issue and root cause analysis.However, there have been complaints reported in the past for burst pouch.The most probable root cause could be there was too much heat applied or an issue with the raw material.It is important to note that a series of tests are performed during every lot of production.More specifically, inspections are performed to test the seal strength for both the inner seal, where the product would activate and the outer seal.During the test, the pouch is first activated, and the inner seal is broken.The pouch is then placed between two plates.The pouch is compressed until the pressure required per the procedure is reached, 350 lbs minimum.The pouch is left to dwell in the machine for 20 seconds, using a calibrated stopwatch to time it.After the dwell time, the pouch is removed and visually inspected for leaks or spreading of the seam.A pouch with any issues would be rejected at this time and the machine adjusted.If the pouch passes the dwell test it is returned to the machine and the pouch is then compressed until the pouch breaks or reaches over 1000 pounds.The value is then recorded.As part of continuous improvements, a corrective and preventative action (capa) has been opened to address the reported issue through a more robust investigation.The results of investigation have been documented through the referred capa.We will keep monitoring the process for any adverse trends that require immediate attention.This complaint will be used for qa tracking and trending purposes.
|