|
The information provided by bard 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 bard.The following were reviewed as part of this investigation: patient severity, trend analysis, applicable previous investigation(s), sample (if available), and applicable fmea documents.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: visual observation showed 1 sl statlock stabilization device with tricot pad returned.The sample was stuck to its tyvek pouch label.It was not in unopened packaging.Some residue was found on the pad.Functional testing showed the following: the sample did not show significant problems maintaining the clamp closed, and would open without difficulty upon application of pressure.When checking for excess adhesive under the lips into which the prongs lock, some such adhesive was noted under the lip on the right, when the device was oriented such that the text on the pad could be read.Microscopic evaluation showed no more than minor damage on the lips and prongs of the device¿s locking mechanism.Although adhesive was found in the gap underneath one lip, and adhesive has the capacity to interfere with the locking mechanism, other factors may also have contributed to this event.For instance, little is known about the conditions of use except that the original complaint stated that a device was used with a hemodialysis catheter, but rough and repeated use, or use with catheters incompatible with the device (e.G., too large) may also result in wear and difficulty of use.Due to the presence of the adhesive under the lip of the retention device, confirmed by manufacturing review, and given unknown procedural circumstances, the complaint is confirmed.A lot history review (lhr) of juzhf084 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|