|
This programmer was thoroughly inspected and analyzed upon receipt at our quality assurance laboratory, including visual inspection, functional and baseline testing, and review of device memory.Analysis confirmed the programmer touchscreen was unresponsive due to not detecting touch inputs.Broken traces were noted on a flexible cable within the touchscreen assembly, which resulted in the clinical observation of an unresponsive touchscreen.An unresponsive touchscreen is a known and anticipated potential hazard that can occur during use of the device which is accounted for in device risk documentation and labeling.Boston scientific has received similar reported events where the latitude programmer screen became unresponsive to touch and a complaint review confirmed that the occurrence of harm associated with these events is low.Investigation of this behavior has not found any commonalities (i.E., device serial numbers, date of the event, date of manufacture, etc.) in the reports received.Investigation determined that the most common cause of the touchscreen becoming unresponsive during use was the water detection feature within the programmer liquid crystal display (lcd) touchscreen assembly.The purpose of this water detection feature is to detect the presence of water on/near the programmer screen.If water is detected, this feature is designed to disable the touchscreen to prevent water droplets from causing false positive touch inputs during use.Specifically, the investigation determined that various inputs could induce false positive detections of this water detection feature, which then results in an unresponsive touchscreen.Our investigation also identified additional potential causes independent of the water detection feature.These include a variety of unrelated root causes such as hardware, environmental, software, and user-related causes that can be intermittent and not reproducible during laboratory analysis.A risk review was completed and confirmed that the event of date-related software issue was defined in the risk documentation.This event type has been accounted for during product risk analysis to support acceptable risk benefit for the product.Review of labeling determined that the complaint situation was listed in the manual.There was no indication in the complaint that the product was not used in accordance to labeling.The manual was unlikely to be the cause of the reported complaint; translation, wording, or graphics does not require further review.A review of the device history record (dhr) was performed.The review of the dhr identified that there were no process related non-conformances, scrap, or rework performed during the production that could explain the event.The reviews ensure each device meets specification prior to release for use.There is no indication the device manufacturing process contributed to the reported complaint.
|