| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
| 2006N-0292
|
| Unique Device Identification
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FDA Comment Number :
|
| EC1
|
|
|
|
|
| Submitter :
|
| Dr. Jonathan Black
|
| Date & Time:
|
| 08/15/2006 03:08:23
|
|
|
|
|
| Organization :
|
| Clemson University, Clemson, SC
|
|
|
|
|
| Category :
|
| Academia
|
|
|
|
|
| Issue Areas/Comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Developing a System of Unique Device Identifiers (UDI)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| At what level of packaging (that is, unit of use) should UDIs be
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| UDIs should appear on the device and in a label form that may be inserted into a patient's permanent medical record. In regard to the latter form, both optical and electronically readable forms should be considered
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Should unique device identifiers be considered for all devices?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| UDIs should be developed through a public/private consensus process and should be mandatory for all devices intended to be used for periods exceeding 30 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| What are the incentives for establishing a uniform, standardized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| One of the biggest defects in the US medical (non-) system is the absence of long-term use and outcomes data for chronic (greater than 30 days) medical device usage. The implementation of UDIs would be a great enabler to the further development of reliable device data bases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| What should be the role, if any, of FDA in the development and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mandatory for all devices expected to be used for more than 30 days; voluntary for all others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|