An investigation was carried out into the complaint.Based on the information received it appears most that the nimbus 3 / dfs3 mattress could not stay inflated due to a slight tear on the bottom seal in the main cell.It was indicated to us that the mattress should be replaced or fixed as the patient has severe skin breakdown.Review of reportable complaints for nimbus system showed that there are no similar events.Therefore, the incident described above seems to be an isolated event to date.It cannot be clearly established if the nimbus system was being used for patient care when the event took place due to very limited information received.No malfunctions were reported regarding the nimbus pump involved but the mattress was found with a slight tear on the bottom seal in the main cell.Following the above it can be established that the nimbus system was found to have malfunctioned (not to specification) when the event took place.The limited information and lack of possibility to gather more details unfortunately does not allow us to establish the root cause of this failure: we could not establish why there was a slight tear in the mattress.However there is no indication that the pump alarm function has malfunctioned.The pump low pressure alarm activates when the pressure the in mattress cells will drop to the certain level (of 10 mmhg).When there is a low pressure state in the system, the pump needs to detect 3 consecutive cycles of low pressure to activate the alarm.With a 10 minutes cycle, the alarm is triggered after approximately 30 minutes.Therefore, it appears that if the mattress was used in this state with a patient, the alarm in the pump had sounded after 30 minutes, the issue with low pressure in the mattress would have been detected and an appropriate action to move the patient on to another mattress could have been taken.This would have mitigated the potential risk of any hazardous situation.Consequently to the above, we come to the conclusion that it appears highly unlikely that the mattress malfunction contributed to the patient's injury reported "severe skin breakdown" while the device is used as intended and the patient is monitored as it is described in the nimbus instruction for use (ifu).This is shown by the absence of complaints volume with similar scenario when compared to the amount of sold devices and in comparison to their daily use.Our investigations shows there appears to be no clear link between the use of the device with the malfunction and the reported outcome of event, as described.Nevertheless, due to very limited information received regarding the circumstances of the event, we decided to report this event to competent authorities in the abundance of caution.
|