Literature DB >> 28895231

Software-Related Recalls of Health Information Technology and Other Medical Devices: Implications for FDA Regulation of Digital Health.

Jay G Ronquillo1,2, Diana M Zuckerman2.   

Abstract

Policy Points: Medical software has become an increasingly critical component of health care, yet the regulation of these devices is inconsistent and controversial. No studies of medical devices and software assess the impact on patient safety of the FDA's current regulatory safeguards and new legislative changes to those standards. Our analysis quantifies the impact of software problems in regulated medical devices and indicates that current regulations are necessary but not sufficient for ensuring patient safety by identifying and eliminating dangerous defects in software currently on the market. New legislative changes will further deregulate health IT, reducing safeguards that facilitate the reporting and timely recall of flawed medical software that could harm patients. CONTEXT: Medical software has become an increasingly critical component of health care, yet the regulatory landscape for digital health is inconsistent and controversial. To understand which policies might best protect patients, we examined the impact of the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) regulatory safeguards on software-related technologies in recent years and the implications for newly passed legislative changes in regulatory policy.
METHODS: Using FDA databases, we identified all medical devices that were recalled from 2011 through 2015 primarily because of software defects. We counted all software-related recalls for each FDA risk category and evaluated each high-risk and moderate-risk recall of electronic medical records to determine the manufacturer, device classification, submission type, number of units, and product details.
FINDINGS: A total of 627 software devices (1.4 million units) were subject to recalls, with 12 of these devices (190,596 units) subject to the highest-risk recalls. Eleven of the devices recalled as high risk had entered the market through the FDA review process that does not require evidence of safety or effectiveness, and one device was completely exempt from regulatory review. The largest high-risk recall categories were anesthesiology and general hospital, with one each in cardiovascular and neurology. Five electronic medical record systems (9,347 units) were recalled for software defects classified as posing a moderate risk to patient safety.
CONCLUSIONS: Software problems in medical devices are not rare and have the potential to negatively influence medical care. Premarket regulation has not captured all the software issues that could harm patients, evidenced by the potentially large number of patients exposed to software products later subject to high-risk and moderate-risk recalls. Provisions of the 21st Century Cures Act that became law in late 2016 will reduce safeguards further. Absent stronger regulations and implementation to create robust risk assessment and adverse event reporting, physicians and their patients are likely to be at risk from medical errors caused by software-related problems in medical devices.
© 2017 Milbank Memorial Fund.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FDA; electronic medical records; health IT; health information technology; medical device recalls; patient safety; software

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28895231      PMCID: PMC5594275          DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Milbank Q        ISSN: 0887-378X            Impact factor:   4.911


  13 in total

1.  Review of Reported Clinical Information System Adverse Events in US Food and Drug Administration Databases.

Authors:  Risa B Myers; Stephen L Jones; Dean F Sittig
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 2.342

2.  Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: the nature of patient care information system-related errors.

Authors:  Joan S Ash; Marc Berg; Enrico Coiera
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2003-11-21       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  21st Century Cures Act and similar policy efforts: at what cost?

Authors:  Diana M Zuckerman; Nicholas J Jury; Christina E Silcox
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2015-11-23

4.  A risk-based regulatory framework for health IT: recommendations of the FDASIA working group.

Authors:  Sarah P Slight; David W Bates
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2014-04-24       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Population and personalized medicine in the modern era.

Authors:  Jessica L Mega; Marc S Sabatine; Elliott M Antman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  A glimpse of the next 100 years in medicine.

Authors:  Isaac S Kohane; Jeffrey M Drazen; Edward W Campion
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Relationship between early physician follow-up and 30-day readmission among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for heart failure.

Authors:  Adrian F Hernandez; Melissa A Greiner; Gregg C Fonarow; Bradley G Hammill; Paul A Heidenreich; Clyde W Yancy; Eric D Peterson; Lesley H Curtis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Lack of publicly available scientific evidence on the safety and effectiveness of implanted medical devices.

Authors:  Diana Zuckerman; Paul Brown; Aditi Das
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 21.873

9.  Medical device recalls and the FDA approval process.

Authors:  Diana M Zuckerman; Paul Brown; Steven E Nissen
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2011-02-14

10.  Electronic Health Record-Related Events in Medical Malpractice Claims.

Authors:  Mark L Graber; Dana Siegal; Heather Riah; Doug Johnston; Kathy Kenyon
Journal:  J Patient Saf       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 2.844

View more
  8 in total

1.  A Workflow for Ensuring DICOM Compatibility During Radiography Device Software Development.

Authors:  Altay Brusan; Aytac Durmaz; Cengizhan Ozturk
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 4.903

2.  Advances in anesthesia technology are improving patient care, but many challenges remain.

Authors:  D John Doyle; Ashraf A Dahaba; Yannick LeManach
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 2.217

Review 3.  Impact of Design on Medical Device Safety.

Authors:  Teodora Miclăuş; Vasiliki Valla; Angeliki Koukoura; Anne Ahlmann Nielsen; Benedicte Dahlerup; Georgios-Ioannis Tsianos; Efstathios Vassiliadis
Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci       Date:  2019-12-09       Impact factor: 1.778

4.  Cybersecurity features of digital medical devices: an analysis of FDA product summaries.

Authors:  Ariel Dora Stern; William J Gordon; Adam B Landman; Daniel B Kramer
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-06-28       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Health IT, hacking, and cybersecurity: national trends in data breaches of protected health information.

Authors:  Jay G Ronquillo; J Erik Winterholler; Kamil Cwikla; Raphael Szymanski; Christopher Levy
Journal:  JAMIA Open       Date:  2018-06-11

6.  Performance of Zernike polynomials in reconstructing raw-elevation data captured by Pentacam HR, Medmont E300 and Eye Surface Profiler.

Authors:  Yueying Wei; Bernardo T Lopes; Ashkan Eliasy; Richard Wu; Arwa Fathy; Ahmed Elsheikh; Ahmed Abass
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2021-12-18

7.  Connected Medical Technology and Cybersecurity Informed Consent: A New Paradigm.

Authors:  Jeffrey Tully; Andrea Coravos; Megan Doerr; Christian Dameff
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-03-30       Impact factor: 5.428

8.  Using informatics to guide public health policy during the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA.

Authors:  Jay G Ronquillo; William T Lester; Diana M Zuckerman
Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 2.341

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.