Physical Medicine Devices; Reclassification of Stair-Climbing Wheelchairs, 35173-35178 [2013-13864]
Download as PDF
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
With Decreased Susceptibility to
Ciprofloxacin in Argentina,’’ Journal of
Antimicrobial Chemotherapy,
2005;55(4):596–597 (available at https://
jac.oxfordjournals.org/content/55/4/
596.longlong).
144. Richardson, A. R., Z. Yu, T. Popovic, et
al., ‘‘Mutator Clones of Neisseria
meningitidis in Epidemic Serogroup A
Disease,’’ Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 2002;99(9):6103–
6107 (available at https://www.pnas.org/
content/99/9/6103.long).
145. Klein, E., D. L. Smith, and R.
Laxminarayan, ‘‘Hospitalizations and
Deaths Caused by Methicillin-Resistant
Staphylococcus aureus, United States,
1999–2005,’’ Emerging Infectious
Diseases, 2007;13(12):1840–46 (available
at https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/13/
12/07–0629_article.htm).
146. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, ‘‘ABCs Report: MethicillinResistant Staphylococcus aureus, 2010,’’
(available at https://www.cdc.gov/abcs/
reports-findings/survreports/
mrsa10.html).
147. Pichichero, M. E. and J. R. Casey,
‘‘Emergence of a Multiresistant Serotype
19A Pneumococcal Strain Not Included
in the 7-Valent Conjugate Vaccine as an
Otopathogen in Children,’’ The Journal
of the American Medical Association,
2007; 298(15):1772–1778 (available at
https://jama.jamanetwork.com/
article.aspx?articleid=209195).
148. Jenkins, S. G. and D. J. Farrell, ‘‘Increase
in Pneumococcus Macrolide Resistance,
United States,’’ Emerging Infectious
Diseases, 2009;15(8):1260–4 (available at
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/15/8/
08–1187_article.htm).
´
´
149. Luaces Cubells, C., J. J. Garcıa Garcıa, J.
´
Roca Martınez, et al. ‘‘Clinical Data in
Children With Meningococcal
Meningitis in a Spanish Hospital,’’ Acta
Paediatrica, 1997;86(1):26–9.
150. Jones, A. M., M. E. Dodd, J. R. Govan,
et al., ‘‘Burkholderia cenocepacia and
Burkholderia multivorans: Influence on
Survival in Cystic Fibrosis,’’ Thorax,
2004;59:948–951 (available at https://
thorax.bmj.com/content/59/11/948.
full.pdf+html).
151. Gaynes, R., J. R. Edwards, and the
National Nosocomial Infections
Surveillance System, ‘‘Overview of
Nosocomial Infections Caused by GramNegative Bacilli,’’ Clinical Infectious
Diseases, 2005;41:848–854 (available at
https://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/41/
6/848.full.pdf+html).
152. Livermore, D. M., ‘‘Multiple
Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Resistance
in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Our Worst
Nightmare?’’ Clinical Infectious Diseases,
2002;34:634–640 (available at https://
cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/34/5/
634.full.pdf).
153. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, ‘‘CDC Grand Rounds: The
Growing Threat of Multidrug-Resistant
Gonorrhea,’’ Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report, February 15,
2013;62(06):103–106 (available at https://
www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwr
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
html/mm6206a3.htm?s_cid=mm6206a3
_w).
154. Wong, M. R., V. Reddy, H. Hanson, et
al., ‘‘Antimicrobial Resistance Trends of
Shigella Serotypes in New York City,
2006–2009,’’ Microbial Drug Resistance,
2010;16(2):155–161 (available at https://
online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/
mdr.2009.0130).
155. Alcaine, S. D., L. D. Warnick, and M.
Weidmann, ‘‘Antimicrobial Resistance in
Nontyphoidal Salmonella,’’ Journal of
Food Protection, 2007;70(3):780–790
(available at https://
fdamedlibmd.library.ingent
aconnect.com/content/iafp/jfp/2007/000
00070/00000003/art00039?token=004f1d
70bd125ed42bda039412f415d
763f252445744a6c246c514d2530482
9552c4b49266d656c).
156. Keessen, E. C., A. J. van den Berkt, N.
H. Haasjes, et al., ‘‘The Relation Between
Farm Specific Factors and Prevalence of
Clostridium difficile in Slaughter Pigs,’’
Veterinary Microbiology, 2011;154:130–
134 (available at https://
www.sciencedirect.com/science?_
ob=MiamiImageURL&_cid=271229&_
user=861681&_
pii=S0378113511003609&_check=y&_
coverDate=2011–12–29&view=c&
wchp=dGLbVlk-zSkWz&md5=64cf941f
6a32b5b6b3b606f74984d7be&pid=1-s2.0
–S0378113511003609-main.pdf).
157. Shulman, S. T., A. L. Bisno, H. W. Clegg,
et al., ‘‘Clinical Practice Guideline for the
Diagnosis and Management of Group A
Streptococcal Pharyngitis: 2012 Update
by the Infectious Diseases Society of
America,’’ Clinical Infectious Disease,
2012;55(10):e86-e102 (available at https://
cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/55/10/
e86.long).
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 317
Antibiotics, Communicable diseases,
Drugs, Health, Health care,
Immunization, Prescription drugs,
Public health.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 317 is
proposed to be added to read as follows:
PART 317—QUALIFYING PATHOGENS
Sec.
317.1 [Reserved]
317.2 List of qualifying pathogens that have
the potential to pose a serious threat to
public health.
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 355E, 371.
§ 317.2 List of qualifying pathogens that
have the potential to pose a serious threat
to public health.
The term ‘‘qualifying pathogen’’ in
section 505E(f) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act is defined to
mean any of the following:
(a) Acinetobacter species.
(b) Aspergillus species.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35173
(c) Burkholderia cepacia complex.
(d) Campylobacter species.
(e) Candida species.
(f) Clostridium difficile.
(g) Enterobacteriaceae.
(h) Enterococcus species.
(i) Mycobacterium tuberculosis
complex.
(j) Neisseria gonorrhoeae.
(k) Neisseria meningitidis.
(l) Non-tuberculous mycobacteria
species.
(m) Pseudomonas species.
(n) Staphylococcus aureus.
(o) Streptococcus agalactiae.
(p) Streptococcus pneumoniae.
(q) Streptococcus pyogenes.
(r) Vibrio cholerae.
Dated: June 5, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013–13865 Filed 6–11–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 890
[Docket No. FDA–2013–N–0568]
Physical Medicine Devices;
Reclassification of Stair-Climbing
Wheelchairs
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Proposed order.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is issuing a
proposed administrative order to
reclassify stair-climbing wheelchairs, a
class III device, into class II (special
controls) based on new information and
subject to premarket notification, and to
further clarify the identification.
DATES: Submit either electronic or
written comments on this proposed
order or on the draft guideline by
September 10, 2013. See section XII for
the proposed effective date of any final
order that may publish based on this
proposed order.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. FDA–2013–N–
0568 by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the
following ways:
E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM
12JNP1
35174
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for
paper or CD–ROM submissions):
Division of Dockets Management (HFA–
305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Agency name and
Docket No. FDA–2013–N–0568. All
comments received may be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
additional information on submitting
comments, see the ‘‘Comments’’ heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number(s), found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts
and/or go to the Division of Dockets
Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rebecca Nipper, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1540,
Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301–796–
6527.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background—Regulatory Authorities
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (the FD&C Act), as amended by the
Medical Device Amendments of 1976
(the 1976 amendments) (Pub. L. 94–
295), the Safe Medical Devices Act of
1990 (Pub. L. 101–629), the Food and
Drug Administration Modernization Act
of 1997 (FDAMA) (Pub. L. 105–115), the
Medical Device User Fee and
Modernization Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107–
250), the Medical Devices Technical
Corrections Act (Pub. L. 108–214), the
Food and Drug Administration
Amendments Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110–
85), and the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation
Act (FDASIA) (Pub. L. 112–144), among
other amendments, established a
comprehensive system for the regulation
of medical devices intended for human
use. Section 513 of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360c) established three categories
(classes) of devices, reflecting the
regulatory controls needed to provide
reasonable assurance of their safety and
effectiveness. The three categories of
devices are class I (general controls),
class II (special controls), and class III
(premarket approval).
Under section 513(d) of the FD&C Act,
devices that were in commercial
distribution before the enactment of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
1976 amendments, May 28, 1976
(generally referred to as preamendments
devices), are classified after FDA has: (1)
Received a recommendation from a
device classification panel (an FDA
advisory committee); (2) published the
panel’s recommendation for comment,
along with a proposed regulation
classifying the device; and (3) published
a final regulation classifying the device.
FDA has classified most
preamendments devices under these
procedures.
A preamendments device that has
been classified into class III may be
marketed by means of premarket
notification procedures (510(k) process)
without submission of a premarket
approval application (PMA) until FDA
issues a final regulation under section
515(b) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360e(b)) requiring premarket approval.
Devices that were not in commercial
distribution prior to May 28, 1976,
(generally referred to as
postamendments devices) are
automatically classified by section
513(f) of the FD&C Act into class III
without any FDA rulemaking process.
Those devices remain in class III and
require premarket approval unless, and
until, the device is reclassified into class
I or II or FDA issues an order finding the
device to be substantially equivalent, in
accordance with section 513(i) of the
FD&C Act, to a predicate device that
does not require premarket approval.
The Agency determines whether new
devices are substantially equivalent to
predicate devices by means of
premarket notification procedures in
section 510(k) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part
807).
The Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990
(Pub. L. 101–629) changed the
definition of class II devices from those
for which a performance standard is
necessary to provide reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness to
those for which there is sufficient
information to establish special controls
to provide such assurance. Special
controls include performance standards.
On July 9, 2012, FDASIA was enacted.
Section 608(a) of FDASIA (126 Stat.
1056) amended the device
reclassification procedures under
section 513(e) of the FD&C Act,
changing the process from rulemaking
to an administrative order. Prior to the
issuance of a final order reclassifying a
device, the following must occur: (1)
Publication of a proposed order in the
Federal Register; (2) a meeting of a
device classification panel described in
section 513(b) of the FD&C Act; and (3)
consideration of comments to a public
docket. The proposed reclassification
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
order must set forth the proposed
reclassification and a substantive
summary of the valid scientific evidence
concerning the proposed
reclassification, including the public
health benefits of the use of the device,
and the nature and incidence (if known)
of the risk of the device. (See section
513(e)(1)(A)(i) of the FD&C Act.) As
required by section 513(b) of the FD&C
Act, FDA intends to schedule a panel
meeting to discuss the proposed
reclassification prior to issuing a final
order.
Section 513(e) of the FD&C Act
provides that FDA may, by
administrative order, reclassify a device
based upon ‘‘new information.’’ FDA
can initiate a reclassification under
section 513(e) or an interested person
may petition FDA. The term ‘‘new
information,’’ as used in section 513(e)
of the FD&C Act, includes information
developed as a result of a reevaluation
of the data before the Agency when the
device was originally classified, as well
as information not presented, not
available, or not developed at that time.
(See, e.g., Holland-Rantos Co. v. United
States Dep’t of Health, Educ., & Welfare,
587 F.2d 1173, 1174 n.1 (D.C. Cir. 1978);
Upjohn v. Finch, 422 F.2d 944 (6th Cir.
1970); Bell v. Goddard, 366 F.2d 177
(7th Cir. 1966).)
Reevaluation of the data previously
before the Agency is an appropriate
basis for subsequent action where the
reevaluation is made in light of newly
available authority (see Bell, 366 F.2d at
181; Ethicon, Inc. v. FDA, 762 F.Supp.
382, 388–391 (D.D.C. 1991)), or in light
of changes in ‘‘medical science’’
(Upjohn v. Finch, 422 F.2d at 951).
Whether data before the Agency are old
or new data, the ‘‘new information’’ to
support reclassification under section
513(e) must be ‘‘valid scientific
evidence,’’ as defined in section
513(a)(3) of the FD&C Act and
§ 860.7(c)(2) (21 CFR 860.7(c)(2)). (See,
e.g., General Medical Co. v. FDA, 770
F.2d 214 (D.C. Cir. 1985); Contact Lens
Association v. FDA, 766 F.2d 592 (D.C.
Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1062
(1985).)
FDA relies upon ‘‘valid scientific
evidence’’ in the classification process
to determine the level of regulation for
devices. To be considered in the
reclassification process, the valid
scientific evidence upon which the
Agency relies must be publicly
available. Publicly available information
excludes trade secret and/or
confidential commercial information,
e.g., the contents of a pending PMA.
(See section 520(c) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360j(c)).) Section 520(h)(4) of the
FD&C Act, added by FDAMA, provides
E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM
12JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
that FDA may use, for reclassification of
a device, certain information in a PMA
6 years after the application has been
approved. This can include information
from clinical and preclinical tests or
studies that demonstrate the safety or
effectiveness of the device but does not
include descriptions of methods of
manufacture or product composition
and other trade secrets.
FDAMA added section 510(m) to the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(m)). Section
510(m) of the FD&C Act provides that a
class II device may be exempted from
the premarket notification requirements
under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act,
if the Agency determines that premarket
notification is not necessary to assure
the safety and effectiveness of the
device.
II. Regulatory History of the Device
On August 28, 1979 (44 FR 50497),
FDA published a document proposing
to classify stair-climbing wheelchair
devices as class III requiring premarket
approval. The Physical Medicine Device
Classification Panel (Panel)
recommended class III because the
Panel believed that satisfactory
performance of this device had not been
demonstrated and, therefore, that it was
not possible to establish an adequate
performance standard for the device.
The Panel said the design of the device
was experimental and data to support
its safe and effective use was not
available. The Panel said the device
should, therefore, be subject to
premarket approval to assure that
manufacturers demonstrate satisfactory
performance of the device and thus
assure its safety and effectiveness. No
comments were received on the
proposed rule. On November 23, 1983
(48 FR 53032), FDA published a
document classifying stair-climbing
wheelchairs as class III devices. On May
11, 1987 (52 FR 17732 at 17741), FDA
published a document amending the
codified language for stair-climbing
wheelchairs to clarify that no effective
date had been established for the
requirement for premarket approval.
On August 18, 1998 (63 FR 44177),
FDA published a document proposing
to require the filing of a PMA or a notice
of competition of a product
development protocol (PDP) for stairclimbing wheelchair devices under
section 515(b) of the FD&C Act. FDA
received no comments on the document
but received one citizen petition
requesting a change in the classification
of the stair-climbing wheelchair from
class III to class II. FDA reviewed the
petition and determined that there was
not sufficient information to establish
special controls to reasonably assure the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
safety and effectiveness of the device.
FDA informed the petitioner in a letter
dated May 10, 1999, that if additional
information was submitted under
section 513(e) of the FD&C Act within
30 days to support the reclassification of
the device, FDA would review the
information. FDA also stated that if the
petitioner did not submit additional
information within 30 days to show that
sufficient information was available to
establish special controls to reasonably
assure the safety and effectiveness of the
device, FDA would deem the
reclassification petition withdrawn.
FDA did not receive any new
information from the petitioner and
deemed the reclassification petition
withdrawn. On April 13, 2000 (65 FR
19833), FDA published a document that
retained in class III stair-climbing
wheelchair devices and that required
the filing of PMAs or PDPs on or before
July 12, 2000.
On November 20, 2012, a
reclassification petition was filed with
FDA, requesting FDA to reclassify stairclimbing wheelchairs from class III to
class II. In accordance with section
513(e) of the FD&C Act and
§ 860.130(b)(3), based on new
information regarding the device, FDA
is now proposing to reclassify the stairclimbing wheelchair device from class
III to class II.
III. Device Description
A stair-climbing wheelchair is a
device with wheels that is intended for
medical purposes to provide mobility to
persons restricted to a sitting position
and is intended to climb stairs while the
patient remains in the chair.
Characteristics of the device enabling
this capability may include two endless
belt tracks that adjust to the angle of the
stairs. This may also include a balancing
mechanism to steady the chair as it
ascends/descends the staircase.
FDA is proposing in this order to
slightly modify the identification
language from how it is presently
written in § 890.3890(a) (21 CFR
890.3890(a)) for a more accurate
description of devices in this
classification.
IV. Proposed Reclassification
FDA is proposing that stair-climbing
wheelchairs be reclassified from class III
to class II. In this proposed order, the
Agency has identified special controls
under section 513(a)(1)(B) of the FD&C
Act that, together with general controls
(including prescription use restrictions)
applicable to the devices, would
provide reasonable assurance of their
safety and effectiveness. FDA believes
that the identified special controls in
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35175
this proposed order, if finalized,
together with general controls
applicable to the device, would provide
reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness. Absent the special
controls identified in this proposed
order, general controls applicable to the
device are insufficient to provide
reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness of the device.
Therefore, in accordance with
sections 513(e) of the FD&C Act and
§ 860.130, based on new information
with respect to the devices and taking
into account the public health benefit of
the use of the device and the nature and
known incidence of the risk of the
device, FDA is proposing to reclassify
this preamendments class III device into
class II. FDA believes that this new
information is sufficient to demonstrate
that the proposed special controls can
effectively mitigate the risks to health
identified in section V, and that these
special controls, together with general
controls, will provide a reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness for
stair-climbing wheelchairs.
Section 510(m) of the FD&C Act
authorizes the Agency to exempt class II
devices from premarket notification
(510(k)) submission. FDA has
considered stair-climbing wheelchairs
in accordance with the reserved criteria
set forth in section 513(a) of the FD&C
Act and determined that these devices
require premarket notification.
Therefore, the Agency does not intend
to exempt this proposed class II device
from premarket notification (section
510(k) of the FD&C Act) submission as
provided for under section 510(m) of the
FD&C Act.
V. Risks to Health
After considering the information
from the reports and recommendations
of the Panel for the classification of
these devices, along with information in
the petition submitted under section
513(e) of the FD&C Act and any
additional information that FDA has at
its disposal, FDA has identified and
evaluated the risks to health associated
with the use of stair-climbing
wheelchairs. The petition dated October
22, 2012 (Ref. 1), identified risks to
health for all stair-climbing wheelchairs;
FDA found these risks to be applicable
and identified additional risks to health
that apply to stair-climbing wheelchair
devices:
• Instability: Instability of the device
could result in the device tipping over,
slipping off an edge (e.g., curb or stair),
or sliding down stairs, or use in certain
environmental conditions that
minimizes frictional coefficient, may
result in injury to the user.
E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM
12JNP1
35176
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
• Entrapment: The device may entrap
a user or a body part if it moves
unintentionally, shifts the user into a
position from which they are unable to
extricate themselves, or pinches a body
part against a solid object.
• Use Error: A stair-climbing
wheelchair may be misused if the user
is not properly secured within the seat
or if the device is used outside of certain
environmental conditions or prescribed
step dimensions, structural
characteristics.
• Falls/Fractures: The device is
physically heavy and if the device falls
or rolls over a body part of the user or
another individual (e.g., caregiver), it
can result in serious injury, including
fracture.
• Battery/electrical/mechanical
failure: The device may fail and place
the user in an unsafe position (e.g.,
middle of a street intersection, on
stairs). This may result from failure of
device critical device components
(electronics, battery, brakes) or the
device changing operational modes
unexpectedly.
• Pressure sores: Pressure sores or
bruising may result from the user
experiencing jarring forces when
transitioning over different surfaces or
from colliding with solid objects.
• Burns: As a result of battery
overheating, electrical failure, or
ignition of flammable materials, the user
may sustain burns.
• Electric shock: The user may
experience electric shock as a result of
battery or electrical failure.
• Electromagnetic interference: The
device may interfere with the operation
of other electrical devices or be
susceptible to interference from other
electrical devices.
VI. Summary of Reasons for
Reclassification
If properly manufactured and used,
FDA believes that these devices can be
utilized to provide mobility over a
variety of terrains and obstacles
encountered in everyday life,
specifically climbing stairs. Many of
these environments would not be
accessible and many tasks could not be
completed without the availability of a
stair-climbing wheelchair. FDA believes
that stair-climbing wheelchairs should
be reclassified from class III to class II
because special controls, in addition to
general controls, can be established to
provide reasonable assurance of the
safety and effectiveness of the devices,
and because general controls themselves
are insufficient to provide reasonable
assurance of its safety and effectiveness.
In addition, there is now adequate
information sufficient to establish
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
special controls to provide such
assurance.
VII. Summary of Data Upon Which the
Reclassification Is Based
FDA believes that the identified
special controls, in addition to general
controls, are necessary to provide
reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness of these devices.
Therefore, in accordance with section
513(e) of the FD&C Act and § 860.130,
based on new information with respect
to the device, FDA, in response to the
petition dated October 22, 2012, and
submitted under section 513(e), is
proposing to reclassify this
preamendments class III device into
class II. Since the time of the original
panel recommendation and device
classification, sufficient evidence has
been developed to support a
reclassification of stair-climbing
wheelchairs from class III to class II
with special controls. The petitioner
cites the petitioner’s own history of use,
the petitioner’s own preclinical testing,
and the development of relevant
consensus standards that provide
sufficient evidence that stair-climbing
wheelchairs can be effective for
providing mobility over a variety of
terrains and obstacles that are
encountered in everyday life.
Specifically, the petitioner notes that
these devices need to comply with the
following consensus standards:
• ‘‘American National Standards
Institute (ANSI)/Rehabilitative
Engineering & Assistive Technology
Society (RESNA) American National
Standard for Wheelchairs—Volume 1:
Requirements and Test Methods for
Wheelchairs (including Scooters),’’
sections 1, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, 16, 22, and
26. These are consensus standards
applicable to both powered and
mechanical wheelchairs to ensure
proper performance regarding static
stability, endurance/fatigue testing, and
flammability as well as characterization
of measurements and dimensions.
• ‘‘ANSI/RESNA American National
Standard for Wheelchairs—Volume 2:
Additional Requirements for
Wheelchairs (including Scooters) with
Electrical Systems,’’ sections 2, 3, 4, 6,
9, 10, 14, and 21. These are consensus
standards applicable to powered
wheelchairs to ensure proper
performance regarding dynamic
stability, brake effectiveness, curb
climbing ability, electrical safety testing
and electromagnetic compatibility
testing as well as characterization of
speed/acceleration, battery longevity,
and environmental testing.
• ‘‘International Standards
Organization (ISO) 7176 Wheelchairs,’’
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
parts 1 to 6, 9 to 11, 13 to 16, and 21.
These consensus standards address the
same testing and attributes noted in the
previously noted volumes of the ANSI/
RESNA standards.
FDA believes that this information
constitutes sufficient evidence to
demonstrate that the proposed special
controls can effectively mitigate the
risks to health identified in section V of
this document, and that these special
controls in addition to the general
controls will provide a reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness for
stair-climbing wheelchairs.
VIII. Proposed Special Controls
FDA believes that the following
special controls, together with general
controls (including applicable
prescription-use restrictions), are
sufficient to mitigate the risks to health
described in section V of this document:
• The design characteristics of the
device must ensure that the geometry
and material composition are consistent
with the intended use.
• Performance testing must
demonstrate adequate mechanical
performance under simulated use
conditions and environments.
Performance testing must include the
following:
Æ Fatigue testing;
Æ Endurance testing;
Æ Resistance to dynamic loads
(impact testing);
Æ Effective use of the braking
mechanism and how the device stops in
case of an electrical brake failure;
Æ Demonstration of adequate stability
of the device on inclined planes
(forward, backward, and lateral);
Æ Demonstration of the ability of the
device to safely ascend and descend
obstacles (e.g., stairs, curb); and
Æ Demonstration of ability to
effectively use the device during
adverse temperatures and following
storage in adverse temperatures and
humidity conditions.
• The skin-contacting components of
the device must be demonstrated to be
biocompatible.
• Software design, verification, and
validation must demonstrate that the
device controls, alarms, and user
interfaces function as intended.
• Appropriate analysis and
performance testing must be conducted
to verify electrical safety and
electromagnetic compatibility of the
device.
• Performance testing must
demonstrate battery safety and evaluate
longevity.
• Performance testing must evaluate
the flammability of device components.
• Patient labeling must bear all
information required for the safe and
E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM
12JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
effective use of the device, specifically
including the following:
Æ A clear description of the
technological features of the device and
the principles of how the device works;
Æ A clear description of the
appropriate use environments/
conditions, including prohibited
environments;
Æ Preventive maintenance
recommendations;
Æ Operating specifications for proper
use of the device such as patient weight
limitations, device width, and clearance
for maneuverability; and
Æ A detailed summary of the devicerelated adverse events and how to report
any complications.
• Clinician labeling must include all
the information in the patient labeling
noted previously but must also include
the following:
Æ Identification of patients who can
effectively operate the device; and
Æ Instructions how to fit, modify, or
calibrate the device.
• Usability studies of the device must
demonstrate that the device can be used
by the patient in the intended use
environment with the instructions for
use and user training.
Stair-climbing wheelchairs are
prescription devices restricted to patient
use only upon the authorization of a
practitioner licensed by law to
administer or use the device. (Proposed
§ 890.3890(a) (21 CFR 870.3890(a)); see
section 520(e) of the FD&C Act and 21
CFR 801.109 (Prescription devices)).
Prescription-use requirements are a type
of general control authorized under
section 520(e) of the FD&C Act and
defined as a general control in section
513(a)(1)(A)(i) of the FD&C Act; and
under § 807.81, the device would
continue to be subject to 510(k)
notification requirements.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
IX. Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.34(b) that this action is of a type
that does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. Therefore,
neither an environmental assessment
nor an environmental impact statement
is required.
X. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed order refers to
previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations.
These collections of information are
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). The collections
of information in 21 CFR part 812 have
been approved under OMB control
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
number 0910–0078; the collections of
information in part 807, subpart E, have
been approved under OMB control
number 0910–0120; the collections of
information in 21 CFR part 814, subpart
B, have been approved under OMB
control number 0910–0231; and the
collections of information under 21 CFR
part 801 have been approved under
OMB control number 0910–0485.
XI. References
The following reference has been
placed on display in the Division of
Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES)
and may be seen by interested persons
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and is available
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov.
35177
and to codify the reclassification of
stair-climbing wheelchairs into class II.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 890
Medical devices, Physical medicine
devices.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs, it is proposed that
21 CFR part 890 be amended as follows:
PART 890—PHYSICAL MEDICINE
DEVICES
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 890 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e,
360j, 371.
2. Section 890.3890 is revised to read
as follows:
1. Petition from Deka Research &
Development Corp., October 22, 2013 (Docket
No. FDA–2012–P–1155).
■
XII. Proposed Effective Date
FDA is proposing that any final order
based on this proposed order become
effective on the date of its publication
in the Federal Register or at a later date
if stated in the final order.
(a) Identification. A stair-climbing
wheelchair is a device with wheels that
is intended for medical purposes to
provide mobility to persons restricted to
a sitting position and is intended to
climb stairs while the patient remains in
the chair. Characteristics of the device
enabling this capability may include
two endless belt tracks that adjust to the
angle of the stairs. This may also
include a balancing mechanism to
steady the chair as it ascends/descends
the staircase.
(b) Classification. Class II (special
controls). The special controls for this
device are:
(1) The design characteristics of the
device must ensure that the geometry
and material composition are consistent
with the intended use.
(2) Performance testing must
demonstrate adequate mechanical
performance under simulated use
conditions and environments.
Performance testing must include the
following:
(i) Fatigue testing;
(ii) Endurance testing;
(iii) Resistance to dynamic loads
(impact testing);
(iv) Effective use of the braking
mechanism and how the device stops in
case of an electrical brake failure;
(v) Demonstration of adequate
stability of the device on inclined
planes (forward, backward and lateral);
(vi) Demonstration of the ability of the
device to safely ascend and descend
obstacles (e.g., stairs, curb); and
(vii) Demonstration of ability to
effectively use the device during
adverse temperatures and following
storage in adverse temperatures and
humidity conditions.
XIII. Comments
Interested persons may submit either
electronic comments regarding this
document or the associated petition to
https://www.regulations.gov or written
comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only
necessary to send one set of comments.
Identify comments with the docket
number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
will be posted to the docket at https://
www.regulations.gov.
XIV. Codification of Orders
Prior to the amendments by FDASIA,
section 513(e) provided for FDA to issue
regulations to reclassify devices.
Although section 513(e) as amended
requires FDA to issue final orders rather
than regulations, FDASIA also provides
for FDA to revoke previously issued
regulations by order. FDA will continue
to codify classifications and
reclassifications in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR). Changes resulting
from final orders will appear in the CFR
as changes to codified classification
determinations or as newly codified
orders. Therefore, under section
513(e)(1)(A)(i), as amended by FDASIA,
in this proposed order, we are proposing
to revoke the requirements in § 890.3890
related to the classification of stairclimbing wheelchairs as class III devices
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 890.3890
E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM
Stair-climbing wheelchair.
12JNP1
35178
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
(3) The skin-contacting components of
the device must be demonstrated to be
biocompatible.
(4) Software design, verification, and
validation must demonstrate that the
device controls, alarms, and user
interfaces function as intended.
(5) Appropriate analysis and
performance testing must be conducted
to verify electrical safety and
electromagnetic compatibility of the
device.
(6) Performance testing must
demonstrate battery safety and evaluate
longevity.
(7) Performance testing must evaluate
the flammability of device components.
(8) Patient labeling must bear all
information required for the safe and
effective use of the device, specifically
including the following:
(i) A clear description of the
technological features of the device and
the principles of how the device works;
(ii) A clear description of the
appropriate use environments/
conditions, including prohibited
environments;
(iii) Preventive maintenance
recommendations;
(iv) Operating specifications for
proper use of the device such as patient
weight limitations, device width, and
clearance for maneuverability; and
(v) A detailed summary of the devicerelated adverse events and how to report
any complications.
(9) Clinician labeling must include all
the information noted previously in the
patient labeling but must also include
the following:
(i) Identification of patients who can
effectively operate the device; and
(ii) Instructions how to fit, modify, or
calibrate the device.
(10) Usability studies of the device
must demonstrate that the device can be
used by the patient in the intended use
environment with the instructions for
use and user training.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Dated: June 5, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013–13864 Filed 6–11–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 1000
[Docket No. FR–5650–N–03]
Indian Housing Block Grant Allocation
Formula: Notice of Proposed
Negotiated Rulemaking Committee
Membership
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of proposed negotiated
rulemaking committee membership.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On September 18, 2012, HUD
published a document in the Federal
Register requesting nominations for
membership on the negotiated
rulemaking committee that will develop
regulatory changes to the funding
formula for the Indian Housing Block
Grant program authorized by the Native
American Housing Assistance and SelfDetermination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA).
In accordance with section 564 of the
Negotiated Rulemaking Act, this
document establishes the committee,
announces the names and affiliations of
the committee’s proposed members,
requests public comment on the
committee and its proposed
membership, explains how additional
nominations for committee membership
may be submitted, and provides other
information regarding the negotiated
rulemaking process.
DATES: Comment Due Date: July 12,
2013.
Interested persons are
invited to submit comments regarding
this notice to the Regulations Division,
Office of General Counsel, Department
of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
Communications must refer to the above
docket number and title. There are two
methods for submitting public
comments. All submissions must refer
to the above docket number and title.
1. Submission of Comments by Mail.
Comments may be submitted by mail to
the Regulations Division, Office of
General Counsel, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451
7th Street SW., Room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410–0500.
2. Electronic Submission of
Comments. Interested persons may
submit comments electronically through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly
encourages commenters to submit
comments electronically. Electronic
submission of comments allows the
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
commenter maximum time to prepare
and submit a comment, ensures timely
receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to
make them immediately available to the
public. Comments submitted
electronically through the
www.regulations.gov Web site can be
viewed by other commenters and
interested members of the public.
Commenters should follow the
instructions provided on that site to
submit comments electronically.
Note: To receive consideration as public
comments, comments must be submitted
through one of the two methods specified
above. Again, all submissions must refer to
the docket number and title of the rule.
No Facsimile Comments. Facsimile
(fax) comments are not acceptable.
Public Inspection of Public Comments.
All properly submitted comments and
communications submitted to HUD will
be available for public inspection and
copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.
weekdays at the above address. Due to
security measures at the HUD
Headquarters building, an advance
appointment to review the public
comments must be scheduled by calling
the Regulations Division at 202–708–
3055 (this is not a toll-free number).
Individuals with speech or hearing
impairments may access this number
via TTY by calling the Federal Relay
Service at 800–877–8339. Copies of all
comments submitted are available for
inspection and downloading at
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rodger Boyd, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Native American
Programs, Room 4126, Office of Public
and Indian Housing, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451
7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410,
telephone number: 202–401–7914 (this
is not a toll-free number). Hearing- or
speech-impaired individuals may access
this number via TTY by calling the tollfree Federal Relay Service at 1–800–
877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Native American Housing
Assistance and Self-Determination Act
of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.)
(NAHASDA) changed the way that
housing assistance is provided to Native
Americans. NAHASDA eliminated
several separate assistance programs
and replaced them with a single block
grant program, known as the Indian
Housing Block Grant (IHBG) program. In
addition, title VI of NAHASDA
authorizes federal guarantees for
financing of certain tribal activities
(Title VI Loan Guarantee program). The
E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM
12JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 12, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35173-35178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13864]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 890
[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0568]
Physical Medicine Devices; Reclassification of Stair-Climbing
Wheelchairs
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Proposed order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing a proposed
administrative order to reclassify stair-climbing wheelchairs, a class
III device, into class II (special controls) based on new information
and subject to premarket notification, and to further clarify the
identification.
DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on this proposed
order or on the draft guideline by September 10, 2013. See section XII
for the proposed effective date of any final order that may publish
based on this proposed order.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2013-
N-0568 by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the following ways:
[[Page 35174]]
Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for paper or CD-ROM
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Agency name
and Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0568. All comments received may be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. For additional information on submitting
comments, see the ``Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number(s), found in brackets in the heading of this document,
into the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the
Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Nipper, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1540,
Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-6527.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background--Regulatory Authorities
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), as amended
by the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (the 1976 amendments) (Pub. L.
94-295), the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-629), the
Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA) (Pub. L.
105-115), the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act of 2002
(Pub. L. 107-250), the Medical Devices Technical Corrections Act (Pub.
L. 108-214), the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007
(Pub. L. 110-85), and the Food and Drug Administration Safety and
Innovation Act (FDASIA) (Pub. L. 112-144), among other amendments,
established a comprehensive system for the regulation of medical
devices intended for human use. Section 513 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360c) established three categories (classes) of devices, reflecting the
regulatory controls needed to provide reasonable assurance of their
safety and effectiveness. The three categories of devices are class I
(general controls), class II (special controls), and class III
(premarket approval).
Under section 513(d) of the FD&C Act, devices that were in
commercial distribution before the enactment of the 1976 amendments,
May 28, 1976 (generally referred to as preamendments devices), are
classified after FDA has: (1) Received a recommendation from a device
classification panel (an FDA advisory committee); (2) published the
panel's recommendation for comment, along with a proposed regulation
classifying the device; and (3) published a final regulation
classifying the device. FDA has classified most preamendments devices
under these procedures.
A preamendments device that has been classified into class III may
be marketed by means of premarket notification procedures (510(k)
process) without submission of a premarket approval application (PMA)
until FDA issues a final regulation under section 515(b) of the FD&C
Act (21 U.S.C. 360e(b)) requiring premarket approval.
Devices that were not in commercial distribution prior to May 28,
1976, (generally referred to as postamendments devices) are
automatically classified by section 513(f) of the FD&C Act into class
III without any FDA rulemaking process. Those devices remain in class
III and require premarket approval unless, and until, the device is
reclassified into class I or II or FDA issues an order finding the
device to be substantially equivalent, in accordance with section
513(i) of the FD&C Act, to a predicate device that does not require
premarket approval. The Agency determines whether new devices are
substantially equivalent to predicate devices by means of premarket
notification procedures in section 510(k) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807).
The Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-629) changed the
definition of class II devices from those for which a performance
standard is necessary to provide reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness to those for which there is sufficient information to
establish special controls to provide such assurance. Special controls
include performance standards.
On July 9, 2012, FDASIA was enacted. Section 608(a) of FDASIA (126
Stat. 1056) amended the device reclassification procedures under
section 513(e) of the FD&C Act, changing the process from rulemaking to
an administrative order. Prior to the issuance of a final order
reclassifying a device, the following must occur: (1) Publication of a
proposed order in the Federal Register; (2) a meeting of a device
classification panel described in section 513(b) of the FD&C Act; and
(3) consideration of comments to a public docket. The proposed
reclassification order must set forth the proposed reclassification and
a substantive summary of the valid scientific evidence concerning the
proposed reclassification, including the public health benefits of the
use of the device, and the nature and incidence (if known) of the risk
of the device. (See section 513(e)(1)(A)(i) of the FD&C Act.) As
required by section 513(b) of the FD&C Act, FDA intends to schedule a
panel meeting to discuss the proposed reclassification prior to issuing
a final order.
Section 513(e) of the FD&C Act provides that FDA may, by
administrative order, reclassify a device based upon ``new
information.'' FDA can initiate a reclassification under section 513(e)
or an interested person may petition FDA. The term ``new information,''
as used in section 513(e) of the FD&C Act, includes information
developed as a result of a reevaluation of the data before the Agency
when the device was originally classified, as well as information not
presented, not available, or not developed at that time. (See, e.g.,
Holland-Rantos Co. v. United States Dep't of Health, Educ., & Welfare,
587 F.2d 1173, 1174 n.1 (D.C. Cir. 1978); Upjohn v. Finch, 422 F.2d 944
(6th Cir. 1970); Bell v. Goddard, 366 F.2d 177 (7th Cir. 1966).)
Reevaluation of the data previously before the Agency is an
appropriate basis for subsequent action where the reevaluation is made
in light of newly available authority (see Bell, 366 F.2d at 181;
Ethicon, Inc. v. FDA, 762 F.Supp. 382, 388-391 (D.D.C. 1991)), or in
light of changes in ``medical science'' (Upjohn v. Finch, 422 F.2d at
951). Whether data before the Agency are old or new data, the ``new
information'' to support reclassification under section 513(e) must be
``valid scientific evidence,'' as defined in section 513(a)(3) of the
FD&C Act and Sec. 860.7(c)(2) (21 CFR 860.7(c)(2)). (See, e.g.,
General Medical Co. v. FDA, 770 F.2d 214 (D.C. Cir. 1985); Contact Lens
Association v. FDA, 766 F.2d 592 (D.C. Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 474
U.S. 1062 (1985).)
FDA relies upon ``valid scientific evidence'' in the classification
process to determine the level of regulation for devices. To be
considered in the reclassification process, the valid scientific
evidence upon which the Agency relies must be publicly available.
Publicly available information excludes trade secret and/or
confidential commercial information, e.g., the contents of a pending
PMA. (See section 520(c) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360j(c)).) Section
520(h)(4) of the FD&C Act, added by FDAMA, provides
[[Page 35175]]
that FDA may use, for reclassification of a device, certain information
in a PMA 6 years after the application has been approved. This can
include information from clinical and preclinical tests or studies that
demonstrate the safety or effectiveness of the device but does not
include descriptions of methods of manufacture or product composition
and other trade secrets.
FDAMA added section 510(m) to the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(m)).
Section 510(m) of the FD&C Act provides that a class II device may be
exempted from the premarket notification requirements under section
510(k) of the FD&C Act, if the Agency determines that premarket
notification is not necessary to assure the safety and effectiveness of
the device.
II. Regulatory History of the Device
On August 28, 1979 (44 FR 50497), FDA published a document
proposing to classify stair-climbing wheelchair devices as class III
requiring premarket approval. The Physical Medicine Device
Classification Panel (Panel) recommended class III because the Panel
believed that satisfactory performance of this device had not been
demonstrated and, therefore, that it was not possible to establish an
adequate performance standard for the device. The Panel said the design
of the device was experimental and data to support its safe and
effective use was not available. The Panel said the device should,
therefore, be subject to premarket approval to assure that
manufacturers demonstrate satisfactory performance of the device and
thus assure its safety and effectiveness. No comments were received on
the proposed rule. On November 23, 1983 (48 FR 53032), FDA published a
document classifying stair-climbing wheelchairs as class III devices.
On May 11, 1987 (52 FR 17732 at 17741), FDA published a document
amending the codified language for stair-climbing wheelchairs to
clarify that no effective date had been established for the requirement
for premarket approval.
On August 18, 1998 (63 FR 44177), FDA published a document
proposing to require the filing of a PMA or a notice of competition of
a product development protocol (PDP) for stair-climbing wheelchair
devices under section 515(b) of the FD&C Act. FDA received no comments
on the document but received one citizen petition requesting a change
in the classification of the stair-climbing wheelchair from class III
to class II. FDA reviewed the petition and determined that there was
not sufficient information to establish special controls to reasonably
assure the safety and effectiveness of the device. FDA informed the
petitioner in a letter dated May 10, 1999, that if additional
information was submitted under section 513(e) of the FD&C Act within
30 days to support the reclassification of the device, FDA would review
the information. FDA also stated that if the petitioner did not submit
additional information within 30 days to show that sufficient
information was available to establish special controls to reasonably
assure the safety and effectiveness of the device, FDA would deem the
reclassification petition withdrawn. FDA did not receive any new
information from the petitioner and deemed the reclassification
petition withdrawn. On April 13, 2000 (65 FR 19833), FDA published a
document that retained in class III stair-climbing wheelchair devices
and that required the filing of PMAs or PDPs on or before July 12,
2000.
On November 20, 2012, a reclassification petition was filed with
FDA, requesting FDA to reclassify stair-climbing wheelchairs from class
III to class II. In accordance with section 513(e) of the FD&C Act and
Sec. 860.130(b)(3), based on new information regarding the device, FDA
is now proposing to reclassify the stair-climbing wheelchair device
from class III to class II.
III. Device Description
A stair-climbing wheelchair is a device with wheels that is
intended for medical purposes to provide mobility to persons restricted
to a sitting position and is intended to climb stairs while the patient
remains in the chair. Characteristics of the device enabling this
capability may include two endless belt tracks that adjust to the angle
of the stairs. This may also include a balancing mechanism to steady
the chair as it ascends/descends the staircase.
FDA is proposing in this order to slightly modify the
identification language from how it is presently written in Sec.
890.3890(a) (21 CFR 890.3890(a)) for a more accurate description of
devices in this classification.
IV. Proposed Reclassification
FDA is proposing that stair-climbing wheelchairs be reclassified
from class III to class II. In this proposed order, the Agency has
identified special controls under section 513(a)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act
that, together with general controls (including prescription use
restrictions) applicable to the devices, would provide reasonable
assurance of their safety and effectiveness. FDA believes that the
identified special controls in this proposed order, if finalized,
together with general controls applicable to the device, would provide
reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. Absent the special
controls identified in this proposed order, general controls applicable
to the device are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of the
safety and effectiveness of the device.
Therefore, in accordance with sections 513(e) of the FD&C Act and
Sec. 860.130, based on new information with respect to the devices and
taking into account the public health benefit of the use of the device
and the nature and known incidence of the risk of the device, FDA is
proposing to reclassify this preamendments class III device into class
II. FDA believes that this new information is sufficient to demonstrate
that the proposed special controls can effectively mitigate the risks
to health identified in section V, and that these special controls,
together with general controls, will provide a reasonable assurance of
safety and effectiveness for stair-climbing wheelchairs.
Section 510(m) of the FD&C Act authorizes the Agency to exempt
class II devices from premarket notification (510(k)) submission. FDA
has considered stair-climbing wheelchairs in accordance with the
reserved criteria set forth in section 513(a) of the FD&C Act and
determined that these devices require premarket notification.
Therefore, the Agency does not intend to exempt this proposed class II
device from premarket notification (section 510(k) of the FD&C Act)
submission as provided for under section 510(m) of the FD&C Act.
V. Risks to Health
After considering the information from the reports and
recommendations of the Panel for the classification of these devices,
along with information in the petition submitted under section 513(e)
of the FD&C Act and any additional information that FDA has at its
disposal, FDA has identified and evaluated the risks to health
associated with the use of stair-climbing wheelchairs. The petition
dated October 22, 2012 (Ref. 1), identified risks to health for all
stair-climbing wheelchairs; FDA found these risks to be applicable and
identified additional risks to health that apply to stair-climbing
wheelchair devices:
Instability: Instability of the device could result in the
device tipping over, slipping off an edge (e.g., curb or stair), or
sliding down stairs, or use in certain environmental conditions that
minimizes frictional coefficient, may result in injury to the user.
[[Page 35176]]
Entrapment: The device may entrap a user or a body part if
it moves unintentionally, shifts the user into a position from which
they are unable to extricate themselves, or pinches a body part against
a solid object.
Use Error: A stair-climbing wheelchair may be misused if
the user is not properly secured within the seat or if the device is
used outside of certain environmental conditions or prescribed step
dimensions, structural characteristics.
Falls/Fractures: The device is physically heavy and if the
device falls or rolls over a body part of the user or another
individual (e.g., caregiver), it can result in serious injury,
including fracture.
Battery/electrical/mechanical failure: The device may fail
and place the user in an unsafe position (e.g., middle of a street
intersection, on stairs). This may result from failure of device
critical device components (electronics, battery, brakes) or the device
changing operational modes unexpectedly.
Pressure sores: Pressure sores or bruising may result from
the user experiencing jarring forces when transitioning over different
surfaces or from colliding with solid objects.
Burns: As a result of battery overheating, electrical
failure, or ignition of flammable materials, the user may sustain
burns.
Electric shock: The user may experience electric shock as
a result of battery or electrical failure.
Electromagnetic interference: The device may interfere
with the operation of other electrical devices or be susceptible to
interference from other electrical devices.
VI. Summary of Reasons for Reclassification
If properly manufactured and used, FDA believes that these devices
can be utilized to provide mobility over a variety of terrains and
obstacles encountered in everyday life, specifically climbing stairs.
Many of these environments would not be accessible and many tasks could
not be completed without the availability of a stair-climbing
wheelchair. FDA believes that stair-climbing wheelchairs should be
reclassified from class III to class II because special controls, in
addition to general controls, can be established to provide reasonable
assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the devices, and because
general controls themselves are insufficient to provide reasonable
assurance of its safety and effectiveness. In addition, there is now
adequate information sufficient to establish special controls to
provide such assurance.
VII. Summary of Data Upon Which the Reclassification Is Based
FDA believes that the identified special controls, in addition to
general controls, are necessary to provide reasonable assurance of
safety and effectiveness of these devices. Therefore, in accordance
with section 513(e) of the FD&C Act and Sec. 860.130, based on new
information with respect to the device, FDA, in response to the
petition dated October 22, 2012, and submitted under section 513(e), is
proposing to reclassify this preamendments class III device into class
II. Since the time of the original panel recommendation and device
classification, sufficient evidence has been developed to support a
reclassification of stair-climbing wheelchairs from class III to class
II with special controls. The petitioner cites the petitioner's own
history of use, the petitioner's own preclinical testing, and the
development of relevant consensus standards that provide sufficient
evidence that stair-climbing wheelchairs can be effective for providing
mobility over a variety of terrains and obstacles that are encountered
in everyday life. Specifically, the petitioner notes that these devices
need to comply with the following consensus standards:
``American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/
Rehabilitative Engineering & Assistive Technology Society (RESNA)
American National Standard for Wheelchairs--Volume 1: Requirements and
Test Methods for Wheelchairs (including Scooters),'' sections 1, 5, 7,
8, 11, 13, 15, 16, 22, and 26. These are consensus standards applicable
to both powered and mechanical wheelchairs to ensure proper performance
regarding static stability, endurance/fatigue testing, and flammability
as well as characterization of measurements and dimensions.
``ANSI/RESNA American National Standard for Wheelchairs--
Volume 2: Additional Requirements for Wheelchairs (including Scooters)
with Electrical Systems,'' sections 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 14, and 21.
These are consensus standards applicable to powered wheelchairs to
ensure proper performance regarding dynamic stability, brake
effectiveness, curb climbing ability, electrical safety testing and
electromagnetic compatibility testing as well as characterization of
speed/acceleration, battery longevity, and environmental testing.
``International Standards Organization (ISO) 7176
Wheelchairs,'' parts 1 to 6, 9 to 11, 13 to 16, and 21. These consensus
standards address the same testing and attributes noted in the
previously noted volumes of the ANSI/RESNA standards.
FDA believes that this information constitutes sufficient evidence
to demonstrate that the proposed special controls can effectively
mitigate the risks to health identified in section V of this document,
and that these special controls in addition to the general controls
will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness for
stair-climbing wheelchairs.
VIII. Proposed Special Controls
FDA believes that the following special controls, together with
general controls (including applicable prescription-use restrictions),
are sufficient to mitigate the risks to health described in section V
of this document:
The design characteristics of the device must ensure that
the geometry and material composition are consistent with the intended
use.
Performance testing must demonstrate adequate mechanical
performance under simulated use conditions and environments.
Performance testing must include the following:
[cir] Fatigue testing;
[cir] Endurance testing;
[cir] Resistance to dynamic loads (impact testing);
[cir] Effective use of the braking mechanism and how the device
stops in case of an electrical brake failure;
[cir] Demonstration of adequate stability of the device on inclined
planes (forward, backward, and lateral);
[cir] Demonstration of the ability of the device to safely ascend
and descend obstacles (e.g., stairs, curb); and
[cir] Demonstration of ability to effectively use the device during
adverse temperatures and following storage in adverse temperatures and
humidity conditions.
The skin-contacting components of the device must be
demonstrated to be biocompatible.
Software design, verification, and validation must
demonstrate that the device controls, alarms, and user interfaces
function as intended.
Appropriate analysis and performance testing must be
conducted to verify electrical safety and electromagnetic compatibility
of the device.
Performance testing must demonstrate battery safety and
evaluate longevity.
Performance testing must evaluate the flammability of
device components.
Patient labeling must bear all information required for
the safe and
[[Page 35177]]
effective use of the device, specifically including the following:
[cir] A clear description of the technological features of the
device and the principles of how the device works;
[cir] A clear description of the appropriate use environments/
conditions, including prohibited environments;
[cir] Preventive maintenance recommendations;
[cir] Operating specifications for proper use of the device such as
patient weight limitations, device width, and clearance for
maneuverability; and
[cir] A detailed summary of the device-related adverse events and
how to report any complications.
Clinician labeling must include all the information in the
patient labeling noted previously but must also include the following:
[cir] Identification of patients who can effectively operate the
device; and
[cir] Instructions how to fit, modify, or calibrate the device.
Usability studies of the device must demonstrate that the
device can be used by the patient in the intended use environment with
the instructions for use and user training.
Stair-climbing wheelchairs are prescription devices restricted to
patient use only upon the authorization of a practitioner licensed by
law to administer or use the device. (Proposed Sec. 890.3890(a) (21
CFR 870.3890(a)); see section 520(e) of the FD&C Act and 21 CFR 801.109
(Prescription devices)). Prescription-use requirements are a type of
general control authorized under section 520(e) of the FD&C Act and
defined as a general control in section 513(a)(1)(A)(i) of the FD&C
Act; and under Sec. 807.81, the device would continue to be subject to
510(k) notification requirements.
IX. Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this action is
of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
X. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed order refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR part 812 have been approved under
OMB control number 0910-0078; the collections of information in part
807, subpart E, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0120;
the collections of information in 21 CFR part 814, subpart B, have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0231; and the collections of
information under 21 CFR part 801 have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0485.
XI. References
The following reference has been placed on display in the Division
of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and may be seen by interested
persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and is
available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov.
1. Petition from Deka Research & Development Corp., October 22,
2013 (Docket No. FDA-2012-P-1155).
XII. Proposed Effective Date
FDA is proposing that any final order based on this proposed order
become effective on the date of its publication in the Federal Register
or at a later date if stated in the final order.
XIII. Comments
Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document or the associated petition to https://www.regulations.gov
or written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to send one set of comments. Identify
comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and will
be posted to the docket at https://www.regulations.gov.
XIV. Codification of Orders
Prior to the amendments by FDASIA, section 513(e) provided for FDA
to issue regulations to reclassify devices. Although section 513(e) as
amended requires FDA to issue final orders rather than regulations,
FDASIA also provides for FDA to revoke previously issued regulations by
order. FDA will continue to codify classifications and
reclassifications in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Changes
resulting from final orders will appear in the CFR as changes to
codified classification determinations or as newly codified orders.
Therefore, under section 513(e)(1)(A)(i), as amended by FDASIA, in this
proposed order, we are proposing to revoke the requirements in Sec.
890.3890 related to the classification of stair-climbing wheelchairs as
class III devices and to codify the reclassification of stair-climbing
wheelchairs into class II.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 890
Medical devices, Physical medicine devices.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, it is
proposed that 21 CFR part 890 be amended as follows:
PART 890--PHYSICAL MEDICINE DEVICES
0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 890 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 371.
0
2. Section 890.3890 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 890.3890 Stair-climbing wheelchair.
(a) Identification. A stair-climbing wheelchair is a device with
wheels that is intended for medical purposes to provide mobility to
persons restricted to a sitting position and is intended to climb
stairs while the patient remains in the chair. Characteristics of the
device enabling this capability may include two endless belt tracks
that adjust to the angle of the stairs. This may also include a
balancing mechanism to steady the chair as it ascends/descends the
staircase.
(b) Classification. Class II (special controls). The special
controls for this device are:
(1) The design characteristics of the device must ensure that the
geometry and material composition are consistent with the intended use.
(2) Performance testing must demonstrate adequate mechanical
performance under simulated use conditions and environments.
Performance testing must include the following:
(i) Fatigue testing;
(ii) Endurance testing;
(iii) Resistance to dynamic loads (impact testing);
(iv) Effective use of the braking mechanism and how the device
stops in case of an electrical brake failure;
(v) Demonstration of adequate stability of the device on inclined
planes (forward, backward and lateral);
(vi) Demonstration of the ability of the device to safely ascend
and descend obstacles (e.g., stairs, curb); and
(vii) Demonstration of ability to effectively use the device during
adverse temperatures and following storage in adverse temperatures and
humidity conditions.
[[Page 35178]]
(3) The skin-contacting components of the device must be
demonstrated to be biocompatible.
(4) Software design, verification, and validation must demonstrate
that the device controls, alarms, and user interfaces function as
intended.
(5) Appropriate analysis and performance testing must be conducted
to verify electrical safety and electromagnetic compatibility of the
device.
(6) Performance testing must demonstrate battery safety and
evaluate longevity.
(7) Performance testing must evaluate the flammability of device
components.
(8) Patient labeling must bear all information required for the
safe and effective use of the device, specifically including the
following:
(i) A clear description of the technological features of the device
and the principles of how the device works;
(ii) A clear description of the appropriate use environments/
conditions, including prohibited environments;
(iii) Preventive maintenance recommendations;
(iv) Operating specifications for proper use of the device such as
patient weight limitations, device width, and clearance for
maneuverability; and
(v) A detailed summary of the device-related adverse events and how
to report any complications.
(9) Clinician labeling must include all the information noted
previously in the patient labeling but must also include the following:
(i) Identification of patients who can effectively operate the
device; and
(ii) Instructions how to fit, modify, or calibrate the device.
(10) Usability studies of the device must demonstrate that the
device can be used by the patient in the intended use environment with
the instructions for use and user training.
Dated: June 5, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-13864 Filed 6-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P