(b)(6).Investigation conclusion: not confirmed: bd cannot confirm/reproduce the incident in question needle pulled out of hub.Samples/ photos analysis: neither sample nor picture sent by the customer, only retention sample analyzed.The batch in question was manufactured during march 4th 2016 to march 7th 2016.According to machine assembly maintenance records, it was checked for a performance adjustment.Moreover the procedures for detecting this kind of failure were done during whole shift.Maintenance review: there are no quality notifications (qn) in the maintenance records.The analysis of the batch history had no quality notifications found, only maintenance records.As neither picture nor sample were provided, bd analyzed internal retention sample.They were within specifications and consequently bd was not able to confirm the defect needle pulled out of hub.According the bd procedures, the hub cannula extract test was performed in 25 pieces every shift start.In case one defect is found the whole lot was rejected.In addition this scope will be monitored to evaluate any further occurrence.Root cause description: since neither sample nor picture was provided, unfortunately bd was not able to confirm the defect or determine the root cause.Rationale: based on severity and occurrence a capa is not required.
|