Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
701 Labeling requirements; The 800 series are for medical devices: 803 Medical device reporting; 814 Premarket approval of medical devices [3] 820 et seq. Quality system regulations (analogous to cGMP, but structured like ISO) [4] 860 et seq. Listing of specific approved devices and how they are classified; The 900 series covers mammography ...
The practice of reusing medical devices labeled for only one use began in hospitals in the late 1970s. [8] After a thorough review by the U.S. FDA in 1999 and 2000, [8] the agency released a guidance document for reprocessed SUDs that began regulating the sale of these reprocessed devices on the market, [9] under the condition that third-party reprocessors would be treated as the manufacturer ...
In drug development and medical device development [1] the Investigator's Brochure (IB) is a comprehensive document summarizing the body of information about an investigational product ("IP" or "study drug") obtained during a drug trial. The IB is a document of critical importance throughout the drug development process and is updated with new ...
Medical devices first came under comprehensive regulation with the passage of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 (FD&C), [9] which replaced the earlier Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. The FD&C allowed the FDA to perform factory inspections and prohibited misbranded marketing of cosmetic and therapeutic medical devices. [10]
However, additional specifications may be applied in national and continental contexts. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) layers additional specifications onto its requirements for eCTD submissions, including PDF, transmission, file format, and supportive file specifications.
Without a common vocabulary for medical devices, meaningful analysis based on data from existing voluntary systems is problematic. Reliable and consistent identification of medical devices would enable safety surveillance so that the FDA and manufacturers could better identify potential problems or device defects, and improve patient care.
But, as with all FDA guidances, it was not intended to convey the full force of law—rather, it expressed the FDA's "current thinking" on Part 11 compliance. Many within the industry, while pleased with the more limited scope defined in the guidance, complained that, in some areas, the 2003 guidance contradicted requirements in the 1997 Final ...
Good documentation practice (recommended to abbreviate as GDocP to distinguish from "good distribution practice" also abbreviated GDP) is a term in the pharmaceutical and medical device industries to describe standards by which documents are created and maintained.