|
It was initially reported to ventec that the device had provided a low fio2 (fraction of inspired oxygen) alert during an event involving a patient.Ventec reached out to the reporter in order to obtain additional information about the patient and the event, and was advised that they weren't sure if they could release that information, and that "i know the vent was not on the patient and no patient harm." ventec has reached out to the reporter multiple times in order to get clarification as to whether or not there was patient use.No response has been received.
|
|
Corrected information for supplemental medwatch report 001: section d1, brand name, of the initial medwatch report stated: vocsn.Section d1, brand name, of the initial medwatch report should have stated: vocsn-vc.Section d4, model #, of the initial medwatch report stated: prt-00900-001.Section d4, model #, of the initial medwatch report should have stated: vocsn-vc pro, english.Section d4, udi #, of the initial medwatch report stated: (b)(4).Section d4, udi #, of the initial medwatch report should have stated: (b)(4).New information for supplemental medwatch report 001: h6: ventec has made multiple attempts to reach out to the initial reporter in order to confirm whether or not this device will be returned to ventec for an evaluation.No response has been received.The device has not been returned to ventec for evaluation.The cause of the reported issue could not be determined.
|