Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Survey of “Health Care Providers' Responses to Medical Device Labeling”, 12597-12598 [2012-4969]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2012 / Notices
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 2,850.
Additional Information
Copies of the proposed collection may
be obtained by writing to the
Administration for Children and
Families, Office of Planning, Research
and Evaluation, 370 L’Enfant
Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447,
Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All
requests should be identified by the title
of the information collection. Email
address: infocollection@acf.hhs.gov.
OMB Comment
OMB is required to make a decision
concerning the collection of information
between 30 and 60 days after
publication of this document in the
Federal Register. Therefore, a comment
is best assured of having its full effect
if OMB receives it within 30 days of
publication. Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
directly to the following: Office of
Management and Budget, Paperwork
Reduction Project. Fax: 202–395–7285.
Email:
OIRA_SUBMISSION@OMB.EOP.GOV.
Attn: Desk Officer for the
Administration for Children and
Families.
Robert Sargis,
Reports Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012–4973 Filed 2–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2011–N–0766]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission for Office of
Management and Budget Review;
Comment Request; Survey of ‘‘Health
Care Providers’ Responses to Medical
Device Labeling’’
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is announcing
that a proposed collection of
information has been submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and clearance under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Fax written comments on the
collection of information by April 2,
2012.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:25 Feb 29, 2012
Jkt 226001
To ensure that comments on
the information collection are received,
OMB recommends that written
comments be faxed to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX:
202–395–7285, or emailed to
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. All
comments should be identified with the
OMB control number 0910–NEW and
title ‘‘Survey of ‘Health Care Providers’
Responses to Medical Device
Labeling’ ’’). Also include the FDA
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel Gittleson, Office of Information
Management, Food and Drug
Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50–
400B, Rockville, MD 20850, 301–796–
5156, Daniel.Gittleson@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA
has submitted the following proposed
collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.
ADDRESSES:
Survey of ’’Health Care Providers’
Responses to Medical Device
Labeling’’—21 CFR Part 801 (OMB
Control Number 0910–NEW)
The purpose of this study is to
determine the most effective device
labeling format and inform an FDA’s
regulatory approach on standardized
device labeling. Building upon the
research methodology and success of
the approach FDA used to evaluate drug
labeling, we propose to ask health care
providers (HCPs) to evaluate the quality
of labeling (e.g. instructions for use,
directions) for a medical device and to
report the degree to which they could
follow those instructions, how useful
the information is, and how well
organized the information is. This work
will allow FDA to assess whether HCPs
find the format and content of device
labeling clear, understandable, useful,
and user-friendly. Findings will provide
evidence to inform FDA’s regulatory
approach to standardizing medical
device labeling across the United States.
In the Federal Register of November
1, 2011 (76 FR 67459), FDA published
a 60-day notice requesting public
comment on the proposed collection of
information.
Two comments were received,
however only one was related to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. In
response to the comments submitted by
Advamed, FDA responses are as
follows:
(Comment 1) Comment 1 questioned
whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of FDA’s functions,
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12597
including whether the information will
have practical utility.
(Response) The survey is designed to
elicit responses on the formatting,
content, and design of the template and
not on the specific medical device
chosen. This is stated at the beginning
of the survey. FDA relies upon
knowledgeable researchers to develop
appropriate survey tools, and the
research methodology to test content,
format, and design of labeling is based
on their expertise. Drugs instructions
are written for all users, including
health care providers and patients. The
device labeling is written for all users,
including health care providers and
patients. We agree that industry could
provide recommended contents and
formats of labeling and encourage
industry to do so. This survey is
designed for the health care provider
and their feedback.
(Comment 2) Comment 2 questioned
the accuracy of FDA’s estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used.
(Response) The survey is designed to
elicit responses on the formatting,
content, and design of the template and
not on the specific medical device
chosen. The terms used in the templates
such as ‘‘warnings’’,
‘‘contraindications’’, and ‘‘brand name’’
are commonly used terms in labeling for
all devices. We are addressing what
should be in a shortened version of
labeling that will allow the user to
operate it safely. The survey was
designed by researchers with extensive
knowledge in the area of testing
labeling. It is anticipated that different
health care practitioners will provide
different answers based on their
experiences; this is why we chose to ask
various types of health care
practitioners. The objective of the
survey is to improve device labeling; it
would not be possible to do a survey
with a fictitious device that has no
intended use as per the suggestion. All
devices need to have intended use.
(Comment 3) Comment 3 questioned
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected.
(Response) We did not choose
biomedical engineers as part of this
survey because we wanted the people
who interact with the pump in the
presence of patients. The suggestion to
add a question about whether a health
care professional ever uses or reads
device labeling and how to improve
access to current device labeling was
done in a previous study with focus
groups. We developed the template
survey based on the responses we
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
12598
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2012 / Notices
received in those focus group sessions.
We agree that responses will vary
depending on the professional group
and anticipate this. We developed this
survey with professional researchers
who develop surveys, and this was also
tested internally. We trust that the
questions and how they are asked are
what we need in order to inform any
further actions on medical device
labeling content and format
development. In regard to conducting
objective usability tests with a range of
medical device types, we encourage
others to perform these types of tests
and share the results with FDA.
FDA estimates the burden of this
collection of information as follows:
TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN 1
Number of
responses per
respondent
Number of
respondents
Respondents
Average
burden per
response
Total annual
responses
Total hours
Interviews
Physicians ............................................................................
Advanced practice nurses (NPs) and registered nurses .....
Medical technicians ..............................................................
6
9
9
1
1
1
6
9
9
1
1
1
6
9
9
Subtotal .........................................................................
24
1
24
1
24
Survey
Physicians ............................................................................
Advanced practice nurses (NPs) and registered nurses .....
Medical technicians ..............................................................
120
240
240
1
1
1
120
240
240
0.5
0.5
0.5
60
120
120
Total ..............................................................................
624
1
624
0.5
324
1 There
are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
Dated: February 27, 2012.
David Dorsey,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Policy and
Planning.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
[FR Doc. 2012–4969 Filed 2–29–12; 8:45 am]
Center for Scientific Review; Notice of
Closed Meetings
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
National Institutes of Health
Notice Correction; A Multi-Center
International Hospital-Based CaseControl Study of Lymphoma in Asia
(AsiaLymph) (NCI)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The Federal Register notice published
on February 24, 2012 (77 FR 11136)
announcing the submission to OMB of
the project titled, ‘‘A multi-center
international hospital-based casecontrol study of lymphoma in Asia
(AsiaLymph) (NCI)’’ was submitted with
an error. The ‘‘Type of Information
Collection Request’’ was incorrectly
listed as an Emergency. This submission
should be considered a new submission.
Dated: February 24, 2012.
Vivian Horovitch-Kelley,
NCI Project Clearance Liaison, National
Institutes of Health.
[FR Doc. 2012–4884 Filed 2–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:25 Feb 29, 2012
Jkt 226001
National Institutes of Health
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, as
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is
hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the
public in accordance with the
provisions set forth in sections
552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C.,
as amended. The grant applications and
the discussions could disclose
confidential trade secrets or commercial
property such as patentable material,
and personal information concerning
individuals associated with the grant
applications, the disclosure of which
would constitute a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy.
Name of Committee: AIDS and Related
Research Integrated Review Group,
NeuroAIDS and other End-Organ Diseases
Study Section.
Date: March 20, 2012.
Time: 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Agenda: To review and evaluate grant
applications.
Place: Sheraton Delfina Santa Monica
Hotel, 530 West Pico Boulevard, Santa
Monica, CA 90405.
Contact Person: Eduardo A. Montalvo,
Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for
Scientific Review, National Institutes of
Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5108,
MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–
1168, montalve@csr.nih.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Name of Committee: Center for Scientific
Review Special Emphasis Panel, Member
Conflict: Cognition, Perception and Speech.
Date: March 20, 2012.
Time: 3 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Agenda: To review and evaluate grant
applications.
Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701
Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892
(Telephone Conference Call).
Contact Person: Weijia Ni, Ph.D., Scientific
Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review,
National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge
Drive, Room 3184, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD
20892, (301) 237–9918, niw@csr.nih.gov.
Name of Committee: Center for Scientific
Review Special Emphasis Panel, Review of
Behavioral and Social HIV/AIDS RFA
Applications.
Date: March 21, 2012.
Time: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Agenda: To review and evaluate grant
applications.
Place: Sheraton Delfina Santa Monica
Hotel, 530 West Pico Boulevard, Santa
Monica, CA 90405.
Contact Person: Mark P. Rubert, Ph.D.,
Scientific Review Officer, Center for
Scientific Review, National Institutes of
Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5218,
MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–
1775, rubertm@csr.nih.gov.
Name of Committee: Center for Scientific
Review Special Emphasis Panel, Member
Conflict: Learning and Memory.
Date: March 21, 2012.
Time: 1 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Agenda: To review and evaluate grant
applications.
Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701
Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892
(Telephone Conference Call).
Contact Person: M. Catherine Bennett,
Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 41 (Thursday, March 1, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12597-12598]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4969]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0766]
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Survey of ``Health
Care Providers' Responses to Medical Device Labeling''
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by April
2, 2012.
ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX: 202-395-7285, or emailed to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-NEW and
title ``Survey of `Health Care Providers' Responses to Medical Device
Labeling' ''). Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in
the heading of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Gittleson, Office of
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr.,
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850, 301-796-5156,
Daniel.Gittleson@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.
Survey of ''Health Care Providers' Responses to Medical Device
Labeling''--21 CFR Part 801 (OMB Control Number 0910-NEW)
The purpose of this study is to determine the most effective device
labeling format and inform an FDA's regulatory approach on standardized
device labeling. Building upon the research methodology and success of
the approach FDA used to evaluate drug labeling, we propose to ask
health care providers (HCPs) to evaluate the quality of labeling (e.g.
instructions for use, directions) for a medical device and to report
the degree to which they could follow those instructions, how useful
the information is, and how well organized the information is. This
work will allow FDA to assess whether HCPs find the format and content
of device labeling clear, understandable, useful, and user-friendly.
Findings will provide evidence to inform FDA's regulatory approach to
standardizing medical device labeling across the United States.
In the Federal Register of November 1, 2011 (76 FR 67459), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information.
Two comments were received, however only one was related to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. In response to the comments submitted
by Advamed, FDA responses are as follows:
(Comment 1) Comment 1 questioned whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions,
including whether the information will have practical utility.
(Response) The survey is designed to elicit responses on the
formatting, content, and design of the template and not on the specific
medical device chosen. This is stated at the beginning of the survey.
FDA relies upon knowledgeable researchers to develop appropriate survey
tools, and the research methodology to test content, format, and design
of labeling is based on their expertise. Drugs instructions are written
for all users, including health care providers and patients. The device
labeling is written for all users, including health care providers and
patients. We agree that industry could provide recommended contents and
formats of labeling and encourage industry to do so. This survey is
designed for the health care provider and their feedback.
(Comment 2) Comment 2 questioned the accuracy of FDA's estimate of
the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used.
(Response) The survey is designed to elicit responses on the
formatting, content, and design of the template and not on the specific
medical device chosen. The terms used in the templates such as
``warnings'', ``contraindications'', and ``brand name'' are commonly
used terms in labeling for all devices. We are addressing what should
be in a shortened version of labeling that will allow the user to
operate it safely. The survey was designed by researchers with
extensive knowledge in the area of testing labeling. It is anticipated
that different health care practitioners will provide different answers
based on their experiences; this is why we chose to ask various types
of health care practitioners. The objective of the survey is to improve
device labeling; it would not be possible to do a survey with a
fictitious device that has no intended use as per the suggestion. All
devices need to have intended use.
(Comment 3) Comment 3 questioned ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.
(Response) We did not choose biomedical engineers as part of this
survey because we wanted the people who interact with the pump in the
presence of patients. The suggestion to add a question about whether a
health care professional ever uses or reads device labeling and how to
improve access to current device labeling was done in a previous study
with focus groups. We developed the template survey based on the
responses we
[[Page 12598]]
received in those focus group sessions. We agree that responses will
vary depending on the professional group and anticipate this. We
developed this survey with professional researchers who develop
surveys, and this was also tested internally. We trust that the
questions and how they are asked are what we need in order to inform
any further actions on medical device labeling content and format
development. In regard to conducting objective usability tests with a
range of medical device types, we encourage others to perform these
types of tests and share the results with FDA.
FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:
Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Average
Respondents Number of responses per Total annual burden per Total hours
respondents respondent responses response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interviews
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physicians...................... 6 1 6 1 6
Advanced practice nurses (NPs) 9 1 9 1 9
and registered nurses..........
Medical technicians............. 9 1 9 1 9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................... 24 1 24 1 24
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Survey
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physicians...................... 120 1 120 0.5 60
Advanced practice nurses (NPs) 240 1 240 0.5 120
and registered nurses..........
Medical technicians............. 240 1 240 0.5 120
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 624 1 624 0.5 324
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
information.
Dated: February 27, 2012.
David Dorsey,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. 2012-4969 Filed 2-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P