(b)(4).(b)(6).This device was returned for service; however, did not meet manufacturing specifications during pre-repair assessment.Reliability engineering evaluated the device and the reported condition was duplicated and confirmed.The assignable root cause was determined to be due to normal wear from use and servicing over time.If additional information should become available, a supplemental medwatch report will be sent accordingly.
|
It was reported from (b)(6) that during service and evaluation, it was observed that the air reamer device motor had seized, jammed and was moving heavy.It was further determined that the device failed the following pre-tests: check the attachment coupling , check for free movement , check the cannulation, check the symmetry, check the trigger function, check safety system and check power with test stand.The event did not occur during a surgical procedure.It was unknown if there were any delays to the surgical procedure or if a spare device was available for use.There was no patient involvement.There were no reports of injuries, medical intervention or prolonged hospitalization.The date of event was unknown.If additional information should become available, a supplemental medwatch report will be submitted accordingly.
|