|
The product involved in the report has not been returned.A review of the device history record is in-progress.All information reasonably known as of 47 july 2025 has been included in the health authority report.Should additional information be obtained a follow-up health authority report will be provided.The information provided by airlife.Represents all of the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant/reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to airlife.Airlife has no independent knowledge of the event reported but is relaying the information that was provided by the user facility where the incident occurred.This product incident is documented in the airlife complaint database and is identified as complaint (b)(4).This information is submitted pursuant to 21 cfr 803, in compliance with the medical device reporting requirement and should not be considered to be an admission that a airlife product is defective or causes serious injury.
|
|
The product involved in the report has not been returned.A review of the device history record is in-progress all information reasonably known as of 47 july 2025 has been included in the health authority report.Should additional information be obtained a follow-up health authority report will be provided.The information provided by airlife.Represents all of the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant/reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to airlife.Airlife has no independent knowledge of the event reported but is relaying the information that was provided by the user facility where the incident occurred.This product incident is documented in the airlife complaint database and is identified as complaint - (b)(4).This information is submitted pursuant to 21cfr803, in compliance with the medical device reporting requirement and should not be considered to be an admission that a airlife product is defective or causes serious injury.Device history record (dhr) review no issues found in the dhr based on the device history record (dhr) review there were no abnormal processing issues noted.All products/packaging were produced per the approved manufacturing procedures, specifications, and inspections.Complaint trend history: the complaint history was reviewed in grand avenue from dates of june 24, 2023, to june 24, 2025, for part number zit-520-5 for failure mode "falling apart".There were four complaints reported for part number zit-520-5 for "falling apart." there were 39 complaints reported for part number zit-520-5 during the same timeframe related to different failure mode.Sales = (b)(4).Calculated occurrence = (43 complaint / (b)(6) sold) x 100 = (b)(4).Occurrence ranking = occasional.Risk assessment: the ultimate risk is low, as that is the highest risk of the following 2 considerations: 1.Patient / caregiver performed risk assessment with rma-20012a rev 7: "infuseit pressure infusor" which is sufficient for part number zit-520-5.The complaint aligns with risk id r50 with a potential cause of hazard being "pressure loss during infusion procedure.(note: no risk of backflow for venous infusions since gravity pressure exceeds venous pressures.)" severity = 2-minor, occurrence = 2 remote; therefore, the risk is acceptable.Per table 1a in ref-20001-c1, these levels indicate low risk.2.Regulatory / compliance reviewed table 2 in ref-20001-c1, and there is low regulatory / compliance risk.Customer response: customer email sent.Health hazard evaluation consideration: it was determined that an hhe is not required according to the criteria in section 8 of sop-20021-c1, rev 4.
|