(b)(4).(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.It was further noted that the worn locking mechanism and water in the motor may have accounted for the noise which was reported in the complaint.The assignable root cause was determined to be due to excessive wear from normal use and servicing.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 damaged components -locking components, worn locking mechanism, motor had water in it.It was further noted that the device failed pre-test for handpiece temperature assessment, safety assessment and air pump assessment.It was noted in the service order that the device makes a strange noise and did not work anymore.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.
|