| Model Number |
90010400499991010 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Failure to Deliver Shock/Stimulation (1133); Unable to Obtain Readings (1516); Failure to Analyze Signal (1539); Failure of Device to Self-Test (2937)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
05/16/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Medical device problem code: 4019.Zoll medical corporation has not received the product for evaluation and this complaint is still under investigation.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Complainant alleged that while attempting to defibrillate a male patient (age unknown), the device (x series s/n (b)(6)) was unable to detect the attached electrode pads and failed to discharge.Complainant indicated that the clinician obtained another device (aed pro s/n (b)(6)) to continue treating the patient and the device prompted a ?unit failed? message, shutdown and would not power up.Paramedics arrived with a third device, shocked the patient and obtained rosc.Complainant indicated that there was no adverse effect to the patient due to the reported malfunction.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This supplemental medwatch report is reporting the evaluation of the device and correcting information submitted on the initial medwatch report.Please reference sections b5, h6 (medical device problem code), d4 model # updated, d4 catalog # removed, d4 primary udi # updated.Evaluation results: the device and disposable battery were returned to zoll medical canada for evaluation.The customer's report related to "device is unable to discharge" is attributed to the cpr adaptor.The cpr adaptor was scrapped after testing.The customer's report related to the same battery could not turn on the device was verified and attributed to a depleted battery.The customer's report related to the unit advised non-shockable on what appears to be a shockable rhythm was confirmed as the device meets specification.Review of the clinical data indicates cpr interference was the main cause of the non-shockable decision.The device was recertified and returned to the customer.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Complainant alleged that while attempting to defibrillate a male patient (age unknown), the device (x series s/n (b)(6) was unable to analyze and failed to discharge.Complainant indicated that the clinician obtained another device (aed pro s/n (b)(6) to continue treating the patient and the device prompted a "unit failed" message, shutdown and would not power up.Paramedics arrived with a third device, shocked the patient and obtained rosc.Complainant indicated that there was no adverse effect to the patient due to the reported malfunction.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|