Reporter¿s phone number: (b)(6).The device was returned for service; however, did not meet manufacturing specifications during pre-repair assessment.Reliability engineering evaluated the device and the reported condition was confirmed.The assignable root cause was determined to be due to worn out motor from normal use and servicing over time.If additional information should become available, a supplemental medwatch report will be sent accordingly.
|
It was reported by (b)(6) that during service and evaluation, it was observed that the motor device had a damaged component-blades and blades broken.During pre-repair diagnostics assessment, it was determined that the device had low power (rpms) and was loud (over the sound specification) due to the broken blades.This event did not occur during surgery.There was no patient involvement.There were no reports of injuries, medical intervention or prolonged hospitalization.The exact date of this event was unknown.All available information has been disclosed.If additional information should become available, a supplemental medwatch report will be submitted accordingly.
|