The review of batch records did not provide evidence to support defective product, there were no defects recorded for the batch.Shiftly production transition notes for the batch were reviewed.There were no issues noted that could explain this defect.This batch has been reviewed from a manufacturing perspective.There are no known site investigations associated with this batch.No quality issues were identified upon this review of the batch device history record, in process attributes and variable quality checks or, inspection of retained samples.Retained samples met the product description and the product is within expiration date.The product quality for the batch is not impacted by this complaint.
|
Event verbatim [preferred term] she has an abscess on her back since she has been using the product [subcutaneous abscess].Case narrative:this is a spontaneous report from a contactable consumer via medical information department.A (b)(6) year old female patient started to receive thermacare heatwrap (thermacare heatwrap), batch number r97316, from an unspecified date at an unspecified frequency for an unspecified indication.The patient medical history and concomitant medications were not reported.The patient had an abscess on her back since she has been using the product.She said it had really damaged her back on an unspecified date.She has used the product four times and this was her second box.She thought the product should be removed from the market.The action taken in response to the events for thermacare heatwrap was unknown.The outcome of the events was unknown.According to the product quality complaint group: the review of batch records did not provide evidence to support defective product, there were no defects recorded for the batch.Shiftly production transition notes for the batch were reviewed.There were no issues noted that could explain this defect.This batch has been reviewed from a manufacturing perspective.There are no known site investigations associated with this batch.No quality issues were identified upon this review of the batch device history record, in process attributes and variable quality checks or, inspection of retained samples.Retained samples met the product description and the product is within expiration date.The product quality for the batch is not impacted by this complaint.Follow-up (03jan2018): new information received from product quality complaint group includes investigation results.Follow-up activities closed (22jan2018): follow attempts completed.No further information expected.Follow-up (01dec2017): this follow-up report is being submitted to upgrade this case to a reportable mdr.Company clinical evaluation comment: based on the information provided, the event of "abscess on her back" as described is considered serious bodily injury potentially requiring medical intervention to prevent permanent damage or impairment of body structure.The event is medically assessed as associated with the use of the device.The review of the lot/batch records does not suggest a defect or quality issue related to the manufacture of this lot.No device malfunction has been identified.No remedial action/corrective action/field safety corrective action is suggested at this time., comment: based on the information provided, the event of "abscess on her back" as described is considered serious bodily injury potentially requiring medical intervention to prevent permanent damage or impairment of body structure.The event is medically assessed as associated with the use of the device.The review of the lot/batch records does not suggest a defect or quality issue related to the manufacture of this lot.No device malfunction has been identified.No remedial action/corrective action/field safety corrective action is suggested at this time.
|