|
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 manufacturer has received the sample and will evaluate.Results are expected soon.A lot history review (lhr) of jubrf055 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|
|
The following were reviewed as part of this investigation: patient severity, frequency analysis, applicable previous investigation(s), sample (if available), applicable fmea documents, labeling, and applicable manufacture records.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint that the adhesive substrate was not sticky was inconclusive due to the sample condition.One picc statlock stabilization device was returned for investigation.The returned statlock revealed that the paper backing had been removed from the adhesive substrate and reapplied to the adhesive.After removing the paper backing, the surface of the adhesive substrate was observed to be dull with small areas of a glossy surface.The returned device was compared to an unused statlock device.The unused device exhibited a glossy adhesive surface and increased tack.It appeared that the returned device had been previously applied to a surface before it was returned for investigation.Since the returned device exhibited evidence of use, the original condition of the adhesive substrate was unknown.Whether the skin was properly prepped, which would affect the retention properties of the adhesive substrate, was unknown.A lot history review (lhr) of jubrf055 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|