A facility reported "the drill was not piercing the patient's skull": "the starter drill started the trepanning process, however, it stopped halfway through the procedure.Cutting has stopped, and is necessary to use other means to end the trepanation".No patient injury reported.
|
Updated fields: d4, d9, g3, g6, h2, h3, h4, h6, h10 perforator (id (b)(4)) was returned for evaluation.Device history record (dhr) - there is no indication that the production process may have contributed to this complaint.All test results passed procedural specifications.Failure analysis - the perforator unit was inspected using the unaided eye.The unit was lightly soiled and had a worn label.Instructions for use (ifu) testing procedure was performed with no observed anomalies.Functional testing was performed using the same protocol it underwent at finished goods testing prior to release.The unit was found to perform as intended and fulfilled the acceptance criteria.Furthermore, the customer provided a video of the use of this perforator, in an effort to show what was happening.The investigation team reviewed this video in conjunction with the testing of the unit, and it was noticed in the video that the perforator is spinning in reverse (counterclockwise).As with any standard drill, the clockwise direction is to create holes/drill into the surface, whereas the counterclockwise direction is to remove material from the created hole and will not drill into the surface.The perforator moving counterclockwise explains why the drill would not drill into the skull of the patient.The complaint state could be verified through the video visualization.Root cause analysis - per the complaint background, drill was not drilling.The complaint was confirmed in the complaint investigation via the customer¿s video provided in the complaint report.Per the video and analysis performed in the investigation, the root cause is user error as the drill was spinning in the counterclockwise direction.
|