The incident sample has been requested but to date has not been received for evaluation.If the sample is received, or if additional information pertinent to the incident is obtained a follow-up report will be submitted.As part of our manufacturing process, all device history records are reviewed and approved by quality, prior to release of product.
|
A device history review (dhr) revealed no discrepancies that may have contributed to a complaint of this reported issue.All quality assurance testing performed during manufacturing was acceptable.The quality assurance review of the visual, physical, and dimensional evaluation results concludes the product met specification requirements.In addition, all dhr¿s were reviewed prior to the product release to confirm all requirements were met.The actual sample involved in the reported incident was not returned for evaluation.No additional information, pictures or videos were received.Consequently, it was not possible to evaluate it as part of a comprehensive failure investigation and a probable cause could not be established.If the sample is returned in the future, this complaint will be re-opened for further investigation.According to occurrence analysis performed for this complaint the probability calculated of occurrence of harm (p1 x p2) is (o-1) is equal than the probability expected of occurrence of harm (p1 x p2) is (o-1) defined in the risk analysis chart (rac) for argyle¿ umbilical vessel catheters (uvcs)¿.Therefore, a corrective or preventive action is not deemed necessary at this time and a distributed product field action assessment (dpfa) procedure dpfa was not required for this issue.It must be noted that in-process controls (such as personnel training, incoming quality acceptance testing for raw material, 100% in process visual inspection and visual acceptance sampling are performed in the plant) are in place to prevent nonconforming product from leaving the manufacturing operations.This complaint will be used for tracking and trending purposes.
|