Medical Devices and Device-Led Combination Products; Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program for Manufacturers, 40973-40985 [2018-17770]
Download as PDF
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Garrison, ND, Garrison Muni, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 13, Amdt 2
Garrison, ND, Garrison Muni, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 31, Amdt 2
Manchester, NH, Manchester, Takeoff
Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 10B
Mesquite, NV, Mesquite, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 2, Orig
Mesquite, NV, Mesquite, RNAV (GPS) Z
RWY 2, Orig
Mesquite, NV, Mesquite, Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle DP, Orig
Minden, NV, Minden-Tahoe, RNAV (GPS)-A,
Amdt 1
Minden, NV, Minden-Tahoe, RNAV (GPS)-B,
Amdt 1
Columbus, OH, Bolton Field, ILS OR LOC
RWY 4, Amdt 5A
Columbus, OH, Bolton Field, NDB RWY 4,
Amdt 7A
Columbus, OH, Bolton Field, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 4, Orig-B
Lebanon, OH, Warren County/John Lane
Field, NDB–A, Amdt 6
Idabel, OK, Mc Curtain County Rgnl, RNAV
(GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 1
Idabel, OK, Mc Curtain County Rgnl, RNAV
(GPS) RWY 20, Amdt 1
Corvallis, OR, Corvallis Muni, ILS OR LOC
RWY 17, Amdt 5
Corvallis, OR, Corvallis Muni, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 35, Amdt 3
Corvallis, OR, Corvallis Muni, VOR RWY 17,
Amdt 8
Corvallis, OR, Corvallis Muni, VOR RWY 35,
Amdt 12
Corvallis, OR, Corvallis Muni, VOR–A, Amdt
11
Borger, TX, Hutchinson County, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 17, Amdt 1
Borger, TX, Hutchinson County, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 35, Amdt 1
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, ILS OR LOC
RWY 31L, Amdt 22A
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, ILS OR LOC
RWY 31R, ILS RWY 31R SA CAT I, ILS
RWY 31R SA CAT II, Amdt 7
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, ILS Y OR LOC
Y RWY 13L, Amdt 33A
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, ILS Y OR LOC
Y RWY 13R, Amdt 6A
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, RNAV (GPS)
Y RWY 13L, Amdt 1C
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, RNAV (GPS)
Y RWY 13R, Orig-B
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, RNAV (GPS)
Y RWY 31L, Amdt 1E
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, RNAV (GPS)
Y RWY 31R, Amdt 3
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, RNAV (GPS)
Z RWY 13L, Amdt 3B
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, RNAV (GPS)
Z RWY 13R, Amdt 2A
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, RNAV (RNP)
W RWY 13L, Orig-C
Dallas, TX, Dallas Love Field, RNAV (RNP)
X RWY 13L, Orig-C
Houston, TX, West Houston, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 15, Amdt 1C
Houston, TX, West Houston, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 33, Amdt 1B
Houston, TX, West Houston, VOR–D, Amdt
1, CANCELED
La Grange, TX, Fayette Rgnl Air Center,
Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 1
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
Port Lavaca, TX, Calhoun County, Takeoff
Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-A
RESCINDED: On July 16, 2018 (83 FR
32766), the FAA published an Amendment
in Docket No. 31202, Amdt No. 3807, to Part
97 of the Federal Aviation Regulations under
section 97.25, 97.29, 97.33, and 97.37. The
following entries for Asheville, NC, and
Cleveland, TN, effective September 13, 2018,
are hereby rescinded in their entirety:
Asheville, NC, Asheville Rgnl, ILS OR LOC
RWY 35, Orig
Asheville, NC, Asheville Rgnl, ILS OR LOC
RWY 35, Orig, CANCELED
Asheville, NC, Asheville Rgnl, LOC RWY 17,
Orig
Asheville, NC, Asheville Rgnl, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 17, Orig
Asheville, NC, Asheville Rgnl, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 17, Orig, CANCELED
Asheville, NC, Asheville Rgnl, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 35, Orig
Asheville, NC, Asheville Rgnl, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 35, Orig, CANCELED
Asheville, NC, Asheville Rgnl, Takeoff
Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Cleveland, TN, Cleveland Rgnl Jetport, RNAV
(GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 2
Cleveland, TN, Cleveland Rgnl Jetport, RNAV
(GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 2
Cleveland, TN, Cleveland Rgnl Jetport,
Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 2
[FR Doc. 2018–17619 Filed 8–16–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 803
[Docket No. FDA–2017–N–6730]
Medical Devices and Device-Led
Combination Products; Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program for Manufacturers
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
Notification; order granting
alternative.
ACTION:
The Food and Drug
Administration’s (FDA, Agency, or we)
Center for Devices and Radiological
Health and Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research are
announcing that the Agency is granting
an alternative that permits manufacturer
reporting of certain device malfunction
medical device reports (MDRs) in
summary form on a quarterly basis. We
refer to this alternative as the
‘‘Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program.’’ This voluntary
program reflects goals for streamlining
malfunction reporting outlined in the
commitment letter agreed to by FDA
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40973
and industry and submitted to Congress,
as referenced in the Medical Device
User Fee Amendments of 2017 (MDUFA
IV Commitment Letter).
DATES: This voluntary program applies
only to reportable malfunction events
that manufacturers become aware of on
or after August 17, 2018. See further
discussion in section IV.F. ‘‘Submission
Schedule and Logistics.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michelle Rios, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health (CDRH), Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3222,
Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301–796–
6107, MDRPolicy@fda.hhs.gov; or
Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food
and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301,
Silver Spring, MD 20993, 240–402–
7911; or CBER, Office of
Communication, Outreach, and
Development (OCOD), 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128,
Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002; or by
calling 1–800–835–4709 or 240–402–
8010; or email: ocod@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Every year, FDA receives hundreds of
thousands of MDRs of suspected deviceassociated deaths, serious injuries, and
malfunctions. The Agency’s MDR
program is one of the postmarket
surveillance tools FDA uses to monitor
device performance, detect potential
device-related safety issues, and
contribute to benefit-risk assessments.
Malfunction reports represent a
substantial fraction of the MDRs FDA
receives on an annual basis.
Medical device reporting
requirements for manufacturers are set
forth in section 519 of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21
U.S.C. 360i) and the regulations
contained in part 803 (21 CFR part 803).
Among other things, part 803 requires
the submission of an individual MDR
when a manufacturer becomes aware of
information, from any source, which
reasonably suggests that one of its
marketed devices malfunctioned and
the malfunction of the device or a
similar device marketed by the
manufacturer would be likely to cause
or contribute to a death or serious injury
if the malfunction were to recur
(§§ 803.10(c)(1) and 803.50(a)(2).
Throughout this document, we refer to
such malfunctions as ‘‘reportable
malfunctions’’ or ‘‘reportable
malfunction events.’’
The Food and Drug Administration
Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA)
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
40974
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
(Pub. L. 110–85) amended section 519(a)
of the FD&C Act related to the reporting
of device malfunctions. FDAAA did not
alter the malfunction reporting
requirements for class III devices and
those class II devices that are
permanently implantable, life
supporting, or life sustaining. Under
section 519(a)(1)(B)(i) of the FD&C Act,
as amended by FDAAA, manufacturers
of those devices must continue to
submit malfunction reports in
accordance with part 803 (or successor
regulations), unless FDA grants an
exemption or variance from, or an
alternative to, a requirement under such
regulations under § 803.19. However,
FDAAA amended the FD&C Act to
require that malfunction MDRs for class
I and those class II devices that are not
permanently implantable, life
supporting, or life sustaining—other
than any type of class I or II device that
FDA has, by notice, published in the
Federal Register or by letter to the
person who is the manufacturer or
importer of the device, indicated should
be subject to part 803 in order to protect
the public health—be submitted in
accordance with the criteria established
by FDA. The criteria require the
malfunction reports to be in summary
form and made on a quarterly basis
(section 519(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the FD&C
Act). In the Federal Register of March
8, 2011 (76 FR 12743), FDA explained
that, pending further notice from the
Agency, all class I devices and those
class II devices that are not permanently
implantable, life supporting, or life
sustaining would remain subject to
individual reporting requirements under
part 803 to protect the public health,
pursuant to section 519(a)(1)(B)(i)(III) of
the FD&C Act. Consequently, unless
granted an exemption, variance, or
alternative, manufacturers of those
devices have continued to be required to
submit individual malfunction reports
under part 803. Under § 803.19, FDA
may grant exemptions or variances
from, or alternatives to, any or all of the
reporting requirements in part 803, and
may change the frequency of reporting
to quarterly, semiannually, annually, or
other appropriate time period. FDA may
grant such modifications upon request
or at its discretion, and when granting
such modifications, FDA may impose
other reporting requirements to ensure
the protection of the public health. (See
§ 803.19(c))
In the Federal Register of December
26, 2017 (82 FR 60922), FDA issued a
notification outlining FDA’s proposal to
grant an alternative under § 803.19 to
permit manufacturer reporting of certain
device malfunctions in summary form
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
on a quarterly basis, subject to certain
conditions, and requested comments
(2017 Proposal). As explained in the
2017 Proposal, the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program is intended to reflect goals for
streamlining malfunction reporting that
FDA and industry agreed to in the
MDUFA IV Commitment Letter (Ref. 1).
The 2017 Proposal also summarized
FDA’s previous experience with
summary reporting programs, key
findings from an FDA pilot program for
the submission of MDRs in summary
format on a quarterly basis (see 80 FR
50010, August 18, 2015), additional
background regarding the development
of the proposal, and the anticipated
benefits of summary reporting under the
proposal. Interested persons were given
the opportunity to submit comments by
February 26, 2018.
II. Comments on the Proposed
Alternative and FDA’s Response
In response to the 2017 Proposal, FDA
received 24 comments from industry,
professional societies, trade
organizations, and individual
consumers by the close of the comment
period, each containing one or more
comments on one or more issues. A
summary of the comments to the docket
and our responses follow. To make it
easier to identify comments and our
responses, the word ‘‘Comment’’
appears in parentheses before the
comment’s description, and the word
‘‘Response’’ in parentheses precedes the
response. The comments are grouped
based on common themes and
numbered sequentially.
A. General Comments
(Comment 1) Three comments
suggested that the proposal was
inconsistent with amendments made by
section 227 of FDAAA to section 519(a)
of the FD&C Act regarding malfunction
reporting requirements. Two of these
comments specifically recommended
that FDA immediately implement
summary, quarterly malfunction
reporting under section 519(a)(1)(B)(ii)
of the FD&C Act for all class I devices
and those class II devices that are not
permanently implantable, life
supporting, or life sustaining.
(Response 1) FDA disagrees with
these comments. As discussed in the
2017 Proposal, currently, there are still
reportable malfunctions for which
submission of individual malfunction
reports on a prompter basis than
quarterly is necessary to protect the
public health—for example, when
remedial action is needed to prevent an
unreasonable risk of substantial harm to
the public health. Those situations may
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
involve class I devices and class II
devices that are not permanently
implantable, life supporting, or life
sustaining, and it is not feasible for FDA
to provide notice in the Federal Register
or by letter to individual manufacturers,
pursuant to section 519(a)(1)(B)(i)(III) of
the FD&C Act, each time one of these
situations arises. For example, FDA may
not become aware of the situation until
it receives an MDR from a manufacturer.
Therefore, in accordance with section
519(a)(1)(B)(i)(III) of the FD&C Act,
manufacturers of class I devices and
those class II devices that are not
permanently implantable, life
supporting, or life sustaining remain
subject to individual reporting
requirements in part 803, unless granted
an exemption, variance, or alternative,
to protect the public health. However,
FDA does believe that malfunction
summary reporting on a quarterly basis,
in accordance with the conditions
described in section IV, will reduce
burden on FDA and manufacturers and
allow FDA to effectively monitor many
devices. Accordingly, the Agency is
granting an alternative under section
519(a)(1)(B)(i) of the FD&C Act and
§ 803.19 to permit manufacturers of
those devices to submit summary,
quarterly malfunction reports, with
certain conditions.
(Comment 2) Several comments raised
concerns that the proposed program
would be unable to provide FDA with
critical information on adverse event
reporting. Many of the comments from
individual consumers also raised
concerns that the proposed program
would limit transparency of
malfunction event data that is publicly
available to patients and physicians,
including transparency regarding the
number of reported malfunctions.
However, another comment indicated
that the proposed program would
minimize burden while maintaining
patient safety. That same comment
further indicated that the proposed
malfunction summary reporting format
would enhance public visibility into the
events and associated investigation
compared to a format previously used
for the Alternative Summary Reporting
(ASR) program.
(Response 2) FDA disagrees with the
comments suggesting that the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program will negatively affect patient
safety and the transparency of
malfunction reports. Summary,
quarterly reporting in accordance with
this program will result in some
malfunction reports being submitted to
FDA and added to the publicly available
Manufacturer and User Facility Device
Experience (MAUDE) database later
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
than this occurs under FDA’s current
individual reporting requirements.
However, as explained in our 2017
Proposal, we believe this reporting
format and schedule will also yield
benefits for FDA and the public, such as
helping FDA process malfunction
reports more efficiently and helping
both FDA and the public more readily
identify malfunction trends.
While summary malfunction reports
submitted under this program will
change the format in which information
is presented to FDA, we do not believe
there will be an adverse impact on the
content of information provided to FDA.
The format for summary reporting
described in section IV.D includes a
narrative section for describing
malfunctions, similar to the narrative
section required for individual
reporting. In addition, each narrative
section is required to include a sentence
specifying the number of malfunction
events summarized in the report,
providing transparency for the public
regarding the number of events that a
summary report available in MAUDE
represents. Therefore, we agree with the
comment that the summary reporting
format will improve transparency for
the public when compared to some past
summary reports submitted to FDA,
such as reports submitted under the
ASR program (Ref. 2).
(Comment 3) One comment requested
clarification as to whether a
manufacturer would need to apply or
obtain permission to participate in the
program and asked FDA to clarify how
the proposed program would work with
other alternative summary reporting
situations. Another comment asked FDA
to clarify whether manufacturers can
still apply for an exemption or variance
to be granted under § 803.19 for their
devices that do not fall under an eligible
product code.
(Response 3) FDA is clarifying in the
description of the alternative that
manufacturers do not need to submit a
request or application to FDA before
participating in the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program. For devices that fall within
eligible product codes, the alternative
that FDA is granting under § 803.19
provides that manufacturers may choose
or ‘‘self-elect’’ to participate, subject to
the program conditions identified in
section IV. If a manufacturer wishes to
request a different exemption, variance,
or alternative under § 803.19 (including
for devices in product codes that are
eligible for the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program) the
manufacturer may submit a request to
FDA. For more information regarding
the recommended content of such
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
requests, see section 2.27 of the
Agency’s guidance entitled ‘‘Medical
Device Reporting for Manufacturers:
Guidance for Industry and Food and
Drug Administration Staff’’ (MDR
Guidance) (Ref. 3).
Whether participation in the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program will have an impact
on a manufacturer being granted a
different exemption, variance, or
alternative under § 803.19 will depend
on the scope of the other exemption,
variance, or alternative. FDA will make
a case-by-case determination on
requests for an exemption, variance, or
alternative submitted under § 803.19(b).
B. Scope of Program
(Comment 4) Several comments also
discussed the scope of product codes
that should be eligible for the proposed
program. One comment expressed
concern about including class III
devices and class II devices that are
permanently implantable, lifesupporting, or life-sustaining in the
program and urged FDA to issue another
Federal Register notice with the list of
eligible product codes for these
categories of devices for public
comment before allowing summary,
quarterly malfunction reporting for
those devices. In contrast, another
comment asserted that all devices
should be eligible for malfunction
summary reporting, unless there is an
express determination, subject to public
input, that permitting summary
reporting for a device would present
public health concerns. Other comments
recommended that all device product
codes should be eligible for summary,
quarterly malfunction reporting, with
the exception of product codes for class
III devices and class II devices that are
permanently implantable, life
supporting, or life sustaining when
those product codes have been in
existence for less than 2 years.
(Response 4) FDA disagrees that it
should publish another Federal Register
notice for public comment listing
product codes that would be eligible or
ineligible for the program. Among other
reasons, the Agency expressly requested
comment on the product codes that
should be eligible for the proposed
program, and many commenters
submitted proposed lists of eligible
product codes or identified specific
devices about which they had concerns.
FDA has considered these comments
and has also conducted an extensive
review of all product codes, regardless
of device class, to determine whether
each product code would be eligible. In
addition, consistent with its 2017
Proposal, product codes that have been
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40975
in existence for less than 2 years are not
included in the list of eligible product
codes, unless the new product code was
created solely for administrative
reasons. In FDA’s experience, this 2year period is an important period for
having more timely, detailed
information to monitor malfunction
events. That 2-year timeframe for new
product codes is also consistent with
the MDUFA IV Commitment Letter (Ref.
1).
(Comment 5) Three comments
recommended that importers be
included within the scope of the
proposed program and indicated that
FDA should provide a rationale for not
including them. One of those comments
suggested that without more
information, it appeared arbitrary that
FDA did not include importers and user
facilities in the summary reporting
program.
(Response 5) FDA disagrees with
these comments. Unlike manufacturers,
device user facilities are not required to
submit malfunction reports under part
803. User facilities, such as hospitals or
nursing homes, are required to submit
MDRs to FDA and/or the manufacturer
only for reportable death or serious
injury events. (See section 519(b) of the
FD&C Act; § 803.30(a)).
Importers are also subject to different
requirements for reporting device
malfunctions than those for
manufacturers under part 803. Under
§ 803.40, importers are required to
submit a report to the device
manufacturer, not to FDA, within 30
days after becoming aware of a
reportable malfunction event.
Manufacturers then determine the
reportability of the information received
from the importer and accordingly
submit those reports to FDA. This
program specifically addresses
malfunction summary reporting to FDA.
In addition, we believe it is important
for importers to continue to submit
individual malfunction MDRs to device
manufacturers in accordance with
§ 803.40 so that manufacturers receive
detailed information necessary to
conduct adequate investigations and
follow up related to malfunction events.
C. Individual Reporting Conditions
(Comment 6) One comment suggested
that when requesting that a
manufacturer submit a 5-day report,
FDA should have an objective and
documented basis for making such a
request, as well as an opportunity for
manufacturers to appeal. Other
comments asked FDA to define the term
‘‘substantially similar’’ as used in
describing the program condition
regarding 5-day reports and to clarify
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
40976
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
what constitutes an ‘‘imminent hazard’’
and whether this is analogous to
reportable malfunctions requiring a 5day report.
(Response 6) The circumstances in
which a 5-day report is required are
defined under § 803.53, and those
circumstances remain unchanged for
manufacturers participating in the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program. As stated in the
2017 Proposal, the reporting
requirements at § 803.53 will continue
to apply to manufacturers of devices in
eligible product codes who participate
in this program. We have added a
separate heading to the description of
the alternative to clarify this point
further. For more information regarding
the handling of a 5-day report, please
see section 2.20 of the Agency’s MDR
Guidance (Ref. 3).
The first individual reporting
condition requires that if a manufacturer
submits a 5-day report for an event or
events that require remedial action to
prevent an unreasonable risk of
substantial harm to public health, all
subsequent reportable malfunctions of
the same nature that involve
substantially similar devices must be
submitted as individual MDRs in
accordance with §§ 803.50 and 803.52
until the date that the remedial action
has been resolved to FDA’s satisfaction.
For purposes of this individual
reporting condition, a ‘‘substantially
similar’’ device could be, for example, a
device that is the same except for
certain performance characteristics or a
device that is the same except for
certain cosmetic differences in color or
shape.
Regarding the term ‘‘imminent
hazard,’’ FDA notes that the term is
used to describe one of the general
overarching principles for summary
reporting, but is not included in the
descriptions of any of the individual
reporting conditions. For purposes of
these overarching principles, we intend
‘‘imminent hazard’’ to capture situations
in which a device poses a significant
risk to health and creates a public health
situation that should be addressed
immediately to prevent injury. Use of
that term in one of the overarching
principles was not intended to indicate
any change in the standard for a 5-day
report under § 803.53.
(Comment 7) One comment indicated
that there should be objective and
documented criteria for when FDA
would provide written notice that
manufacturers must submit an
individual, 30-day malfunction report in
accordance with the proposed program
conditions, along with an opportunity
for appeal. The comment further
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
asserted that due process considerations
need to be made regarding these
reporting requirements, including
notice, a written justification for the
request, and a process to appeal.
(Response 7) FDA disagrees that there
should be fixed criteria for notifying a
manufacturer that it must submit an
individual, 30-day malfunction report in
accordance with the program
conditions. Manufacturers who are
notified to submit individual reports in
accordance with the individual
reporting conditions will need to
comply with MDR requirements to
which they would otherwise be subject
if not granted this alternative under
§ 803.19. FDA has provided examples of
when it would make these notifications,
but public health issues that require
submission of individual MDRs to
monitor device safety are not uniform
and may arise in various ways.
FDA will provide written notice to
manufacturers when they need to
submit individual MDRs pursuant to
individual reporting conditions 3 and 4,
as described in section IV.B. In addition,
the Agency already has a process in
place for stakeholders to request review
of decisions made by CDRH employees.
For more information, refer to the FDA
Guidance entitled ‘‘Center for Devices
and Radiological Health Appeals
Processes’’ (Ref. 4).
(Comment 8) Some comments
disagreed with the proposed program
condition that would have required
manufacturers to submit individual, 30day MDRs for reportable malfunction
events that are the subject of any
ongoing device recall and suggested that
the condition be modified or removed.
The comments cited several different
reasons for objecting to this condition,
including that the condition is not
mentioned in the MDUFA IV
Commitment Letter, that the condition
may discourage manufacturers from
conducting voluntary or class III recalls,
that the condition is duplicative of
information that FDA receives during a
recall, and that it may be difficult for
manufacturers to manage the
requirements (e.g., new events may be
uncovered during a product
investigation leading to confusion and
multiple reports for the same incident).
Suggestions from the commenters
regarding this individual reporting
condition included the following: (a)
The condition should only apply to
mandatory or FDA-initiated recalls, and
summary reporting should be permitted
for voluntary or low-risk class III recalls
and for incidents related to remedial
action after the first (parent) MDR is
submitted, unless a death or serious
injury is associated; (b) FDA should
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
clarify how to handle malfunction
events that were not submitted as
individual MDRs, but subsequently,
prior to the next summary reporting
date, are identified to be the result of an
issue addressed by a recall; (c) the
timeframe for submitting individual
MDRs should be changed from 90 days
past the date of the termination of the
recall to 90 days past the date of the
recall; and (d) FDA should clarify what
it means by ‘‘malfunction events of the
same nature.’’
(Response 8) FDA disagrees with the
comments recommending removal of
this individual reporting condition.
Recall classification takes into account
both the severity of harm and the
likelihood of occurrence, and it is
important for FDA to have access to
more timely information on
malfunctions related to certain recalls to
ensure that the recall has been
appropriately classified and that the
recall strategy is effective.
FDA also provides the following
responses to the additional specific
issues raised in the comments: (a) For
the reasons discussed above, FDA
continues to believe that it is important
for malfunctions related to certain
recalls to be reported as individual
MDRs. However, after considering the
comments, FDA has determined that
this individual reporting condition
should only apply to reportable
malfunctions that are the subject of a
recall involving a correction or removal
that must be reported to FDA under part
806 (21 CFR part 806). Under part 806,
manufacturers and importers are
required to make a written report to
FDA of any correction or removal of a
device if the correction or removal was
initiated to reduce a risk to health posed
by the device or to remedy a violation
of the FD&C Act caused by the device
that may present a risk to health, unless
the information has already been
submitted to FDA in accordance with
other reporting requirements. (See
§ 806.10(a) and (f).) Because the
definition of ‘‘risk to health’’ under part
806 tracks the definitions of class I and
class II recalls in § 7.3(m) (21 CFR
7.3(m)), reports of corrections and
removals are required for actions that
meet the definition of class I and class
II recalls. However, under part 806,
manufacturers and importers need not
report events that are categorized as
class III recalls under § 7.3(m) (see 62
FR 27183, May 19, 1997). Therefore, an
action that meets the definition of a
class III recall would not, on its own,
trigger the requirement to submit
individual reports under the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program.
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
(b) FDA agrees that it is important to
provide clarity regarding when the
requirement to submit individual MDRs
is triggered under this individual
reporting condition and the events to
which that requirement applies.
Therefore, FDA is revising the
alternative to clarify that, as of the date
a manufacturer submits a required
report of a correction or removal under
part 806 (or the date that the
manufacturer submits a report of the
correction or removal under 21 CFR part
803 or part 1004 instead, as permitted
under § 806.10(f)), the manufacturer
must submit reportable malfunction
events related to that correction or
removal as individual MDRs in
accordance with §§ 803.50 and 803.52.
We believe these revisions will help
provide manufacturers with a clear date
on which this individual reporting
obligation is triggered.
With respect to malfunction events
that were identified for inclusion in a
summary report but are subsequently
identified as the subject of a reportable
correction or removal prior to the end of
the relevant summary reporting period,
FDA is revising the alternative to state
that a summary MDR must be submitted
for those reportable malfunctions within
30 calendar days of when the
manufacturer submits the required
report of correction or removal. In the
summary report, the manufacturer must
include a check on the box for ‘‘Recall’’
in SECTION H.7 of the electronic Form
FDA 3500A. We have similarly revised
the description of individual reporting
conditions 3 and 4 to clarify the
requirements for handling malfunction
events identified for inclusion in a
summary report (but not yet submitted)
prior to the date that individual
reporting is triggered.
(c) As part of its recall termination
process, FDA considers MDR
information, including reported
malfunctions to help evaluate the
effectiveness of the recall. Therefore,
FDA disagrees with the suggestion to
limit the duration of individual
reporting under this condition to 90
days past the date of a recall. However,
after considering the comments, we do
not believe it is necessary to receive
individual MDRs for reportable
malfunction events that are the subject
of a recall after FDA has terminated the
recall. We have revised the alternative
accordingly (see Section IV.B.2.). For
similar reasons, we have revised the
first individual reporting condition to
state that individual MDRs associated
with a 5-day report are only required
until the remedial action at issue is
resolved to FDA’s satisfaction.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
(d) By ‘‘malfunction events of the
same nature,’’ FDA means additional
reportable malfunction events involving
the same malfunction that prompted the
recall.
(Comment 9) One comment, regarding
proposed individual reporting condition
3, suggested that FDA provide
information on the timing for when the
Agency will provide written notice to a
manufacturer that the manufacturer can
resume participation in the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program.
(Response 9) FDA cannot provide a
uniform timeframe for when the Agency
would notify manufacturers submitting
individual reports due to an identified
public health issue that they can resume
submission of summary, quarterly
malfunction reports for those devices
because the timing and resolution of
public health issues is specific to each
situation.
(Comment 10) Three comments
recommended that FDA clarify what
constitutes a ‘‘new type of reportable
malfunction’’ that is exempt from
summary reporting. One of these
comments indicated that FDA should
provide additional information
regarding when a manufacturer can
begin submitting summary reports for
these new types of device malfunctions.
(Response 10) FDA disagrees that the
meaning of the phrase ‘‘new type of
reportable malfunction’’ was unclear in
the proposal. Manufacturers are
required under § 820.198 (21 CFR
820.198) to evaluate complaints to
determine if they represent events that
must be reported to FDA under part 803
or if an investigation is required.
Through this process, if a manufacturer
identifies a new type of reportable
malfunction that has not previously
been reported to FDA over the life of
that device, this information must be
submitted to FDA as an individual MDR
in accordance with §§ 803.50 and
803.52 and may not be reported to FDA
in a summary malfunction report. This
will allow FDA and manufacturers to
better understand and address emergent
issues with medical devices. We have
revised this individual reporting
condition to clarify that after
manufacturers submit an individual
MDR for the initial occurrence of a
previously unreported type of reportable
malfunction for a device, subsequent
reports for that same type of
malfunction for that device may be in
summary form, unless they are subject
to individual reporting for another
reason.
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40977
D. Reporting Format
(Comment 11) Some comments
suggested that FDA allow manufacturers
to ‘‘bundle together’’ reportable
malfunction events in a summary report
by product code or product family and
allow the use of International Medical
Device Regulators Forum’s (IMDRF)
Level 1,2 codes to bundle like events in
a summary report.
(Response 11) FDA disagrees with the
suggestion that manufacturers be
permitted to bundle reportable
malfunction events by product code or
product family for purposes of
submitting a summary report. Each
unique combination of device brand
name (corresponding to SECTION D1 of
the Form FDA 3500A), device model,
and device problem code(s)
(corresponding to SECTION F10/H6 of
the Form FDA 3500A) can be
summarized together in reports
submitted under this program.
(Comments regarding the number of
brand names that should be included in
each summary report are further
addressed in the response to Comment
16 below, and we have made corrections
to the summary reporting instructions
for SECTION D.4 to be clear that each
summary malfunction report should
summarize events for a single device
model.) Bundling together malfunction
reports by product codes or device
families would make summarizing and
interpreting the information in a
summary report difficult for
manufacturers, FDA, and the public
because a product code or product
family could contain several devices
with different functions, components,
and modes of operation that are
important for purposes of understanding
malfunction events and the causes of
those events. The intent of the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program is to streamline
reporting of events that are the same or
similar, yet not to over bundle reports
such that important details regarding
device performance are obscured.
The IMDRF (Ref. 5) is working
towards harmonization of all medical
device coding, including device
problem codes. To harmonize medical
device coding globally, device problem
codes have been organized in a
hierarchical arrangement, such that
higher level codes (e.g., electrical issue)
describe more general device problems,
while lower level codes (e.g., insulation
issue) provide more granularity into the
type of device problem described. For
purposes of grouping device issues for
reports submitted under this Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program, we recommend that all coding
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
40978
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
be grouped at the lowest level of coding
available, when IMDRF codes are
available. Based on our experience, FDA
does not believe grouping by the lowest
level of coding will eliminate the
efficiency benefits of summary
reporting. FDA does not specify a
specific level of coding, but expects the
most specific appropriate code to be
used.
(Comment 12) One comment noted
that it was unclear whether a summary
malfunction report will be available in
MAUDE or another database. Another
comment recommended that FDA allow
Excel spreadsheets with malfunction
report data to be uploaded to MAUDE.
(Response 12) FDA plans to make
summary reports submitted under the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program publicly available in
MAUDE. However, FDA will not upload
Excel spreadsheets to MAUDE because
they are incompatible with the MAUDE
interface.
(Comment 13) One comment
indicated that FDA should consider
amending the requirement that an
individual process the complaints
twice—once for reporting assessment
and then quarterly.
(Response 13) FDA disagrees with this
comment. FDA is granting an alternative
to the individual reporting requirements
under part 803 for certain reportable
malfunction events. The Quality System
(QS) regulation requires manufacturers
to evaluate all complaints to determine
if they represent events that must be
reported to FDA under part 803
(§ 820.198(a)). If a complaint represents
an MDR reportable event, then the
manufacturer must, among other things,
investigate it and submit an MDR to
FDA. (See §§ 803.10(c), 803.50, and
820.198(d)) The difference for
manufacturers that have been granted
the alternative described in this
document is that they could choose to
report certain malfunction events to
FDA as a summary report instead of as
an individual report.
(Comment 14) One comment
requested that FDA provide more detail
concerning the terms ‘‘similar device’’
and ‘‘similar complaint,’’ as used in the
discussion of the rationale for the
proposed summary reporting format.
(Response 14) The term ‘‘similar
device’’ is used in FDA’s MDR
regulations to describe malfunction
events for which manufacturers must
submit a report to FDA. (see e.g.,
§ 803.50(a)(2)) As used in this
alternative, the term ‘‘similar device’’ is
intended to have the same meaning as
it does for purposes of part 803. FDA’s
MDR Guidance (Ref. 3), provides more
information regarding the factors that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
FDA and manufacturers may consider in
determining if a device is ‘‘similar’’ to
another device.
FDA does not believe it is necessary
to provide a formal definition of the
term ‘‘similar complaint’’ for purposes
of this alternative because that term is
not used in describing any of the
conditions of the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program, including
the required reporting format. Whether
a complaint constitutes a ‘‘similar
complaint’’ for purposes of conducting
an investigation under FDA’s QS
regulation is outside the scope of this
alternative.
(Comment 15) One comment asked
FDA to provide further information on
how a manufacturer is to provide
supplemental information, including
whether FDA expects such information
to be shared with the Agency. Some
comments also noted that FDA should
explain how a previously submitted
summary malfunction report should be
updated with new information,
including how to handle new
information regarding a previously
reported event that would change the
categorization of the event (e.g., if the
manufacturer subsequently became
aware that a serious injury was
associated with a previously reported
malfunction event).
(Response 15) FDA understands the
need for clarification of how to handle
additional information and
supplemental reporting under this
program and has revised the alternative
to address this issue. A manufacturer
participating in the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program must submit an initial
summary report within the Summary
Malfunction Reporting Schedule
timeframe described in table 1.
Supplemental reports to a summary
malfunction report must also be
submitted within that timeframe. For
example, if a manufacturer submits a
summary report for certain malfunction
events of which it became aware in
January to March and in May of that
same year becomes aware of additional
information that would have been
required in the initial summary report if
it had been known to the manufacturer,
then the manufacturer must submit a
supplemental report with that
additional information by July 31.
Manufacturers do not need to submit a
supplemental report for new
information if they would not have been
required to report that information had
it been known or available at the time
of filing the initial summary
malfunction report.
However, this timing for
supplemental reports would not apply
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
when additional information is learned
about an event or events included in a
previously submitted summary report
that triggers individual reporting
requirements. For example, if the
manufacturer becomes aware of
additional information reasonably
suggesting that a previously reported
malfunction meets the criteria for a
reportable serious injury or death event,
then the manufacturer must submit an
initial, individual MDR for the
identified serious injury or death within
30 calendar days of becoming aware of
the additional information. The
manufacturer must simultaneously
submit a supplement to the initial MDR
summary report reducing the number of
events summarized by 1, so that the
total number of events remains the
same. The alternative has been revised
to reflect that these are requirements for
participating in the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program.
(Comment 16) One comment stated
that Form FDA 3500A is not an optimal
format because it is only used for single
event reporting. Other comments made
specific recommendations and/or raised
issues regarding the proposed summary
reporting format using Form FDA
3500A, including the following: (a) In
Form FDA 3500A, SECTIONS B.5 and
H.10, FDA should request that
information be entered in a summary,
high-level form, rather than requiring
detailed descriptions or itemized
investigation findings; (b) clarify the
most ‘‘up to date’’ information that is
expected to be received in the report; (c)
clarify that only one brand name per
product code should be entered in the
field with additional brand names being
provided in a separate attachment
(SECTION D.1); (d) inclusion of patient
age, weight, and breakdown of gender
and race is inappropriate for summary
malfunction reporting, and it is not clear
if such information is required in a
summary malfunction report; (e) clarify
that manufacturers can submit summary
malfunction reports for devices
manufactured at multiple
manufacturing sites (SECTION D.3); (f)
the summary format should permit a
serial number to be used instead of a lot
number to identify the devices that are
the subject of a summary report
(SECTION D.4); and (g) address how a
manufacturer should link a device
problem code with a method code,
result code, and evaluation conclusion
code (if different) for a single summary
report that includes more than one
device problem.
(Response 16) FDA does not believe
the summary reporting format should be
changed to use a new form. The
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program aims to, among other
things, consolidate reporting of same or
similar events into a single summary
report to reduce the overall volume of
reports, while still providing critical
content to FDA. While the Form FDA
3500A was developed for individual
MDRs, manufacturers successfully used
the Form FDA 3500A to submit
summary malfunction reports in FDA’s
pilot program. In addition, as explained
in our 2017 Proposal, for purposes of
streamlining changes that FDA and
manufacturers must make to process or
submit summary reports under the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program, we believe that
using the Form FDA 3500A is the most
efficient approach. We provide the
following responses to the specific
recommendations/issues raised
regarding the summary reporting format:
(a) FDA continues to believe that it is
important for summary malfunction
reports submitted under this program to
provide a similar level of detail in text
narratives as is available in an
individual report to allow for sufficient
understanding of the malfunction, any
circumstances that led to the
malfunction, and any follow-up steps
the manufacturer has taken to
investigate, correct, and prevent the
malfunction from happening again.
These narrative text fields are key to
helping ensure that summary reporting
under this program streamlines
malfunction reporting without reducing
the reporting of important details
regarding device performance and
transparency to the public. (b) Each
summary report must be ‘‘up to date,’’
meaning that it must include all
required information available, as of the
close of the quarterly time period listed
in the Summary Malfunction Reporting
Schedule (see table 1). FDA has clarified
this in section IV.F. (c) FDA disagrees
that separate attachments with
additional brand names should be
permitted to accompany a summary
malfunction report. Each summary
malfunction report may only summarize
malfunction events for a single brand
name. We further clarified this in the
instructions for the summary reporting
format at section IV.D. Including
multiple brand names in an attachment
to a single summary report would,
among other things, result in FDA
having difficulty identifying the specific
malfunction event to the exact device
brand. (d) FDA agrees that information
summarizing patient age, weight,
gender, race, and ethnicity may not be
relevant for many summary malfunction
reports. FDA is revising the description
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
of the summary reporting format to
clarify that inclusion of this information
in Section B.5 is not a required entry for
the form. However, FDA recommends
including descriptors such as patient
weight or race in a text narrative for a
malfunction summary report if the
information is available and indicates
that a malfunction is more likely to
affect a specific group of patients. (e)
FDA is revising the description of the
summary reporting format to clarify that
multiple manufacturing sites could be
entered in SECTION G.1 if the device is
manufactured at multiple sites. We note
that depending on their roles, each
manufacturing site may be responsible
for submitting MDRs. (See e.g., section
2.17 of FDA’s MDR Guidance (Ref. 3),
which provides additional information
regarding reporting obligations for
contract manufacturers.) (f) FDA agrees
that a serial number may be included in
SECTION D.4 and has added ‘‘serial
number’’ to the reporting format
instructions for that section. (g) The
summary reporting format requires
firms to identify the method, result, and
conclusion codes in Block H6 of the
Form FDA 3500A, including as many
codes as are necessary to describe the
event problem and evaluation for the
reportable malfunction events that are
being summarized. If the report
summarizes reportable events that
involved more than one type of device
problem (see e.g., Case Scenario #2,
Report #3 in Appendix A (Ref. 6)),
differences in the conclusion code
according to the different device
problems can be explained in SECTION
H.10.
E. Consideration of Combination
Products
(Comment 17) Some comments raised
issues regarding the application of the
malfunction summary reporting for
combination products that contain a
device constituent part but that are
marketed under drug or biological
product marketing authorization
pathways (referred to in this document
as drug and biologic-led combination
products), as opposed to those under
device marketing authorization
pathways (device-led combination
products). Issues raised in these
comments include: Concerns about a
device product code-based eligibility
approach for drug and biologic-led
combination products because such
products may not have a device product
code; the quarterly schedule proposed
because it would create redundancies
for drug and biologic-led combination
products, which are subject to periodic
reporting; the format proposed because
it might not be compatible with the
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40979
reporting systems for drugs or biological
products that are utilized for drug and
biologic-led combination products; and
development of a single report that
includes malfunction summary
reporting and satisfies other
combination product reporting
requirements.
(Response 17) Among other things,
the final rule on postmarketing safety
reporting (PMSR) for combination
products (81 FR 92603, December 20,
2016), codified in part 4, subpart B (21
CFR part 4, subpart B), clarified that all
combination product applicants must
comply with malfunction reporting
requirements as described in part 803 if
their combination product contains a
device constituent part. Accordingly, in
the 2017 Proposal, FDA requested
comment on how the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program might be implemented for
combination products, including drug
and biologic-led combination products.
Shortly after the issuance of the
proposal for this program, FDA also
published a draft guidance entitled,
‘‘Postmarketing Safety Reporting for
Combination Products; Guidance for
Industry and FDA Staff’’ (PMSR draft
guidance) (Ref. 7) regarding compliance
with the final rule on PMSR for
combination products, and an
Immediately in Effect guidance
announcing FDA’s compliance policy
for that rule (Ref. 8). The PMSR draft
guidance noted that the Agency was
proposing the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program and stated
that the Agency intends to update the
PMSR draft guidance if combination
products are included in the program.
The compliance policy guidance
announced the Agency’s intent to delay
enforcement of certain provisions of the
rule, including malfunction reporting
requirements for drug and biologic-led
combination products, to provide
applicants with additional time to
consider Agency recommendations and
technical specifications as they update
their systems and procedures to comply
with those provisions.
Applicants of device-led combination
products must submit MDRs in
accordance with part 803 (see § 4.104
(21 CFR 4.104)), and therefore, they
report malfunctions using the same
system as device manufacturers. Thus,
FDA believes the eMDR data system and
instructions support use of the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program for such products.
Accordingly, we are including deviceled combination products in the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program. However,
combination product applicants for drug
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
40980
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
and biologic-led combination products
with a device constituent part must
submit malfunction reports under a
different system. Under § 4.104(b),
malfunction reports must be submitted
in accordance with 21 CFR 314.80(g) or
600.80(h)) for these combination
products. Additional considerations,
including the issues raised in comments
as discussed above, need to be
addressed before drug and biologic-led
combination products could be
included in the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program. As noted
above, the Agency intends to delay
enforcement of the malfunction
reporting requirements for drug and
biologic-led combination products
under the PMSR final rule. FDA will
consider all relevant comments
submitted on the 2017 Proposal as well
as those submitted on the PMSR draft
guidance in developing an approach for
voluntary malfunction summary
reporting for such combination
products.
F. Submission Schedule and Logistics
(Comment 18) One comment
recommended that FDA permit
manufacturers to submit individual
reports for each adverse event within 90
calendar days from the date they
become aware of the reportable event,
while using the summary format. The
comment also suggested that FDA
provide an additional 30 days for the
submission of summary reports because
the manufacturer may need more than a
month between the end of the reporting
period and the due date to aggregate
reports.
(Response 18) FDA disagrees with this
comment. Permitting manufacturers to
submit individual reports using the
summary format within 90 calendar
days would delay the submission of
malfunction information to FDA
without providing the anticipated
benefits of summary reporting that FDA
identified in the 2017 Proposal, such as
increased efficiency in processing
malfunction reports and more readily
apparent malfunction trends. While we
recognize that a manufacturer may
become aware of some reportable
malfunction events toward the end of a
quarter, manufacturers will have at least
30 days from that time to prepare and
submit summary malfunction reports.
FDA does not believe that
manufacturers will need an additional
30 days beyond the reporting schedule
outlined in the 2017 Proposal to
aggregate malfunction reports into a
summary report. Therefore, we have
retained the Summary Malfunction
Reporting Schedule that was included
in the 2017 Proposal (see table 1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
(Comment 19) One comment
suggested that FDA use a more generic
reporting number format or a
completely different reporting number
format.
(Response 19) FDA disagrees with this
comment. The required reporting
number format for this program uses the
existing common format that
manufacturers must use to submit
individual reports through their
electronic reporting systems under part
803. Therefore, we believe there is no
need for a separate MDR reporting
number format to identify summary
reports.
(Comment 20) One comment
suggested that FDA clarify what the
manufacturer should do if an
investigation is not completed within
the reported timeframe.
(Response 20) As discussed in
response to Comment 15, FDA has
revised the alternative to include
instructions regarding supplemental
reporting for summary reports
submitted under this voluntary
program. In situations where a
manufacturer is not able to complete its
investigation regarding a reportable
malfunction by the deadline for
submitting a summary report, the
manufacturer is still required to report
the event within the timeframes
specified in the Summary Malfunction
Reporting Schedule (see table 1). If
additional information becomes known
or available to the manufacturer after
submission of a summary report,
including additional information that
becomes known through an
investigation, the manufacturer is
required to submit supplemental reports
amending its initial submission as
needed.
G. Addition of Product Codes to the
Program
(Comment 21) Some comments
suggested that FDA should explain more
clearly how industry would make a
request under § 803.19(b) and provide a
mechanism for industry to request an
exemption, when appropriate, for
product codes that may be newly
assigned within the first 2 years.
(Response 21) FDA is not making any
changes to the alternative in response to
this comment. As discussed in section
VI, FDA intends to periodically assess
the eligibility of product codes after
they have been in existence for 2 years
and will update the FDA’s Product
Classification database accordingly.
Manufacturers can also send a request
for a product code to be added to the list
of eligible product codes and for
manufacturers of devices within that
product code to be granted the same
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
alternative for malfunction events
associated with those devices.
Information about where to send such
requests is provided in section VI.
H. Other Comments
(Comment 22) One comment stated
that the average Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) burden on manufacturers of
6 minutes per response appears to be a
very low estimate.
(Response 22) FDA disagrees with this
comment. The estimation of time is the
amount of time needed to submit a
summary malfunction report. It is
essentially the same amount of time
needed to submit an individual report
because the event narrative should be
similar, with the exception of one
additional line that is entered that
indicates the number of adverse events
represented by the report. It does not
include the time needed to evaluate and
investigate complaints that may
represent reportable malfunction events.
(Comment 23) Two comments
suggested that FDA should provide
clarity on how the program will apply
with national competent authorities via
the National Competent Authority
Report (NCAR) exchange program.
(Response 23) FDA disagrees with this
comment. The NCAR exchange program
is separate from FDA’s MDR reporting
requirements. Malfunction summary
reporting under this program does not
change the information shared through
the NCAR exchange program, and the
NCAR program is currently outside the
scope of the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program.
(Comment 24) One comment suggests
that FDA should use IBM’s Watson
Platform for Health GxP (Watson) to
conduct an analysis to identify the
product codes that represent the largest
opportunity described in the business
case for patients, industry, and FDA
instead of other database systems.
(Response 24) FDA disagrees with this
comment. Among other reasons, the
IBM Watson Platform is not an FDAowned resource; therefore, it is not
logistically feasible for FDA to use this
platform to identify product codes
eligible for the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program at this
time.
III. Principles for Malfunction
Summary Reporting
Informed by the findings from the
Pilot Program for Medical Device
Reporting on Malfunctions, FDA
identified the following overarching
principles for summary reporting of
malfunctions:
• The collection of information in
summary format should allow FDA to
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
collect sufficient detail to understand
reportable malfunction events.
• To increase efficiency, summary
malfunction reporting should occur in a
common format for the electronic
reporting system used.
• Information about reportable
malfunctions should be transparent to
FDA and to the public, regardless of
whether the information is reported as
an individual MDR or a summary
report. Information contained in a
summary malfunction report that is
protected from public disclosure under
applicable disclosure laws would be
redacted prior to release of the report.
• Manufacturers should communicate
information regarding an imminent
hazard at the earliest time possible.
• Summary reporting is meant to
streamline the process of reporting
malfunctions. It does not change
regulatory requirements for MDR-related
investigations or recordkeeping by
manufacturers. (For example,
manufacturers participating in the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program remain subject to
requirements for establishing and
maintaining MDR event files under
§ 803.18. In addition, under the QS
regulation, manufacturers must
evaluate, review, and investigate any
complaint that represents an MDR
reportable event (see § 820.198).
• Summary reporting information
should not be duplicative of information
received through other MDR reporting
processes.
IV. Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program
For the reasons discussed in the 2017
Proposal and in section II, the Agency
has determined that, at this time,
pursuant to section 519(a)(1)(B)(i)(III) of
the FD&C Act, all devices should remain
subject to the reporting requirements of
part 803, to protect the public health.
However, based on the findings from the
2015 Pilot Program, the Agency’s
experience with summary reporting
programs, its experience with MDR
reporting generally, and the comments
received on 2017 Proposal, FDA has
determined that for many devices, it is
appropriate to permit manufacturers to
submit malfunction summary reports on
a quarterly basis, for certain
malfunctions, instead of individual, 30day malfunction reports.
Therefore, under § 803.19, FDA is
granting the manufacturers of devices
within eligible product codes, as
identified in FDA’s Product
Classification Database (https://
www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/
cfdocs/cfPCD/classification.cfm) on
August 17, 2018, an alternative to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
reporting requirements at
§§ 803.10(c)(1), 803.20(b)(3)(ii),
803.50(a)(2), 803.52, and 803.56 with
respect to reportable malfunction events
associated with those devices. The list
reflects FDA’s consideration of a list
proposed by industry representatives,
consistent with the MDUFA IV
Commitment Letter, as well as the
comments received on the 2017
Proposal regarding eligible product
codes. To assist manufacturers and the
public in identifying which product
codes are eligible for participation in
this voluntary program, FDA’s
searchable Product Classification
Database (https://www.accessdata.fda.
gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfPCD/
classification.cfm) has been updated to
reflect such eligibility. As discussed in
section II, FDA is also making some
changes to the conditions of the
alternative after considering the
comments received on the 2017
Proposal.
The alternative permits manufacturers
of devices within eligible product codes
to submit malfunction reports in
summary format on a quarterly basis for
those devices, subject to the conditions
of the alternative described in the
remainder of this section. Such
manufacturers ‘‘self-elect’’ to participate
by submitting summary malfunction
reports in accordance with the
conditions of the alternative. They do
not need to submit a separate
application to FDA to participate.1
The remainder of this section
describes the following conditions that
manufacturers must follow if they
choose to submit summary malfunction
reports for devices within eligible
product codes under the alternative: (1)
The conditions under which individual
malfunction reports are required; (2)
submission of supplemental reports; (3)
the format for summary malfunction
reports; (4) considerations for
combination products; and (5) the
schedule and other logistics for
submission of summary reports.
Because this is an alternative, if a
manufacturer does not submit summary
reports for reportable malfunction
events in accordance with the
conditions described in this section,
including the reporting schedule and
format, then the manufacturer must
submit individual malfunction reports
in compliance with all requirements
1 We note that the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program does not apply to
importers or device user facilities. Therefore,
requirements under part 803 for importers and
device user facilities are unaffected by this
alternative. For example, importers will continue to
submit individual MDRs to the manufacturer under
§ 803.40.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40981
under part 803 (unless the manufacturer
has been granted a different exemption,
variance, or alternative that applies).
A. Events Outside the Scope of This
Alternative
The Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program does not apply to
reportable death or serious injury
events, which are still required to be
reported to FDA within the mandatory
30-calendar-day timeframe, under
§§ 803.50 and 803.52, or within the 5work day timeframe under § 803.53.
Thus, if a manufacturer participating in
the program becomes aware of
information reasonably suggesting that a
device that it markets may have caused
or contributed to a death or serious
injury, then the manufacturer must
submit an individual MDR for that event
because it involves a reportable death or
serious injury.
The reporting requirements at
§ 803.53 also continue to apply to
manufacturers participating in the
program. Under § 803.53(a), a 5-day
report must be filed if a manufacturer
becomes aware of an MDR reportable
event that necessitates remedial action
to prevent an unreasonable risk of
substantial harm to the public health.
Further, under § 803.53(b), if FDA has
made a written request for the
submission of a 5-day report, the
manufacturer must submit, without
further requests, a 5-day report for all
subsequent reportable malfunctions of
the same nature that involve
substantially similar devices for the
time period specified in the written
request. FDA may extend the time
period stated in the original written
request if the Agency determines it is in
the interest of the public health (see
§ 803.53(b)).
B. Individual Reporting Conditions
Manufacturers of devices in eligible
product codes may continue submitting
individual, 30-day malfunction reports
in compliance with §§ 803.50 and
803.52 if they choose to do so. However,
those manufacturers may submit all
reportable malfunction events for
devices in eligible product codes in the
summary format and according to the
schedule described below in section
IV.D and F, unless one of the following
individual reporting conditions applies:
1. A Reportable Malfunction Is
Associated With a 5-Day Report
After submitting a 5-day report
required under § 803.53(a), all
subsequent reportable malfunctions of
the same nature that involve
substantially similar devices must be
submitted as individual MDRs in
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
40982
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
compliance with §§ 803.50 and 803.52
until the date that the remedial action
has been terminated to FDA’s
satisfaction. Summary reporting of
malfunctions may then resume on the
regularly scheduled summary reporting
cycle. Submission of reportable
malfunctions associated with 5-day
reports in this manner will assist FDA
in monitoring the time course and
resolution of the issue presenting an
unreasonable risk of substantial harm to
the public health.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
2. A Reportable Malfunction Is the
Subject of Certain Device Recalls
When a device is the subject of a
recall involving the correction or
removal of the device to address a
malfunction and that correction or
removal is required to be reported to
FDA under part 806,2 all reportable
malfunction events of the same nature
that involve the same device or a similar
device marketed by the manufacturer
must be submitted as individual MDRs
in accordance with §§ 803.50 and
803.52 until the date that the recall is
terminated. After the recall is
terminated, summary reporting may
resume on the regularly scheduled
summary reporting cycle. The
requirement to submit individual
reports under this condition is triggered
on the date that the manufacturer
submits a report of a correction or
removal required under part 806 (or the
date that the manufacturer submits a
report of the correction or removal
under part 803 or part 1004 instead, as
permitted under § 806.10(f)). This will
allow FDA to monitor the frequency of
reportable malfunctions associated with
the recall and effectiveness of the recall
strategy.
If a manufacturer becomes aware of
reportable malfunction events before the
date that the requirement to submit
individual reports is triggered and a
summary report for those events has not
yet been submitted to FDA, then the
manufacturer must submit any of those
malfunction events related to the recall
2 FDA regulations provide that ‘‘[e]ach device
manufacturer or importer shall submit a written
report to FDA of any correction or removal of a
device initiated by such manufacturer or importer
if the correction or removal was initiated: (1) To
reduce a risk to health posed by the device or (2)
to remedy a violation of the act caused by the
device which may present a risk to health unless
the information has already been provided as set
forth in paragraph (f) of this section or the
corrective or removal action is exempt from the
reporting requirements under § 806.1(b).’’ We note
that under part 806, manufacturers and importers
are not required to report a correction or removal
that meets the definition of a class III recall under
21 CFR part 7. (See 21 CFR 7.3(g) and (m), 806.2(d)
and (j) through (k), and 806.10; see also 62 FR
27183 at 27184.)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
in a summary MDR format within 30
calendar days of submitting the required
report of correction or removal. In the
summary MDR, the manufacturer must
include a check box of recall in section
H.7 of the electronic Form FDA 3500A.
3. FDA Has Determined That Individual
MDR Reporting Is Necessary To Address
a Public Health Issue
If FDA has determined that individual
malfunction reports are necessary to
provide additional information and
more rapid reporting for an identified
public health issue involving certain
devices, manufacturers must submit
reportable malfunction events for those
devices as individual MDRs in
compliance with §§ 803.50 and 803.52.
Under these circumstances, FDA will
provide written notification to
manufacturers of relevant devices that
individual MDR submissions are
necessary. FDA will provide further
written notice when manufacturers of
those devices may resume participation
in summary malfunction reporting.
The requirement to submit individual
reports under this condition is triggered
on the date the manufacturer receives
the written notification from FDA. If a
manufacturer became aware of
reportable malfunction events before the
date that the requirement to submit
individual reports is triggered and a
summary report for those events has not
yet been submitted to FDA, then the
manufacturer must submit any of those
malfunction events for the identified
devices to FDA within 30 calendar days
of receiving notification from FDA.
4. FDA Has Determined That a Device
Manufacturer May Not Report in
Summary Reporting Format
FDA may determine that a specific
manufacturer is no longer allowed to
participate in the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program for reasons including, but not
limited to, failure to comply with
applicable MDR requirements under
part 803, failure to follow the conditions
of the program, or the need to monitor
a public health issue. In that case, FDA
will provide written notification to the
device manufacturer to submit
individual malfunction reports in
compliance with §§ 803.50 and 803.52.
The requirement to submit individual
reports under this condition is triggered
on the date the manufacturer receives
the written notification from FDA. If a
manufacturer became aware of
reportable malfunction events before the
date that the requirement to submit
individual reports is triggered under
this condition and a summary report for
those events has not yet been submitted
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
to FDA, then the manufacturer must
submit those malfunction events within
30 calendar days of receiving
notification from FDA.
5. A New Type of Reportable
Malfunction Occurs for a Device
If a manufacturer becomes aware of
information reasonably suggesting a
reportable malfunction event has
occurred for a device that the
manufacturer markets and the
reportable malfunction is a new type of
malfunction that the manufacturer has
not previously reported to FDA for that
device, then the manufacturer must
submit an individual report for that
reportable malfunction in compliance
with §§ 803.50 and 803.52. After the
manufacturer submits this initial
individual report, subsequent
malfunctions of this type may be
submitted in summary form according
to the reporting schedule in table 1,
unless another individual reporting
condition applies.
C. Supplemental Reports
In general, if a manufacturer obtains
information required in a malfunction
summary report (see section IV.D.
describing the required content of a
summary report), that the manufacturer
did not provide because it was not
known or was not available when the
manufacturer submitted the initial
summary malfunction report, the
manufacturer must submit the
supplemental information to FDA in an
electronic format in accordance with
§ 803.12(a). The supplemental
information must be submitted to FDA
by the submission deadline described in
the Summary Malfunction Reporting
Schedule (table 1), according to the date
on which the manufacturer becomes
aware of the supplemental information.
Manufacturers must continue to follow
the requirements for the content of
supplemental reports set forth at
§ 803.56(a) thorough (c), meaning that
on a supplemental or follow up report,
the manufacturer must: (a) Indicate that
the report being submitted is a
supplemental or follow up report; (b)
submit the appropriate identification
numbers of the report that you are
updating with the supplemental
information (e.g., your original
manufacturer report number and the
user facility or importer report number
of any report on which your report was
based), if applicable; and (c) include
only the new, changed, or corrected
information.
However, if a manufacturer submits a
summary malfunction report and
subsequently becomes aware of
information reasonably suggesting that
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
an event (or events) summarized therein
represents a reportable serious injury or
death event, or a new type of reportable
malfunction, then the manufacturer
must submit reports as follows: The
manufacturer must submit an initial,
individual MDR for the identified
serious injury, death, or new type of
reportable malfunction event within 30
calendar days of becoming aware of the
additional information. The
manufacturer must simultaneously
submit a supplement to the initial
malfunction summary report reducing
the number of events summarized
accordingly, so that the total number of
events remains the same.
D. Malfunction Reporting Summary
Format
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Manufacturers of devices in eligible
product codes who elect to participate
in the Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program must submit
summary malfunction reports in the
format described below. As detailed in
the 2017 Proposal and Appendix, the
format largely adopts the format that
was tested in FDA’s Pilot Program for
Medical Device Reporting on
Malfunctions and is compatible with the
Form FDA 3500A (Ref. 9), which allows
manufacturers to submit MDRs using
the same electronic submission form
that they use to submit individual
MDRs, in accordance with the eMDR
Final Rule (79 FR 8832, February 14,
2014). Because summary malfunction
reports represent a grouping of
malfunction events for a specific model
of a device, the summary reporting
format would require an additional
element in the summary text narrative
to identify the number of reportable
malfunctions that each report
represents. As described below, the
XML tags ‘‘’’ and ‘‘’’ are
placed on both sides of the number of
events (NOE) to make the number
extractable from the report. FDA
believes that submission of summary
reports in the format described below
will provide the most compact and
efficient reporting mechanism for
streamlining malfunction reporting that
still provides sufficient detail for FDA to
monitor devices effectively.
Format Instructions: Separate
summary malfunction reports must be
submitted for each unique combination
of brand name, device model, and
problem code(s). (See Appendix A for
case examples of how to report (Ref. 6).)
Each summary malfunction report must
include at least the following
information collected on Form FDA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
3500A and must be submitted in an
electronic format:
• SECTION B.5: Describe Event or
Problem—To distinguish this report as a
summary malfunction report, the first
sentence of the device event narrative
must read: ‘‘This report summarizes
XXX malfunction
events,’’ where XXX is replaced by the
number of malfunction events being
summarized.
The device event narrative must then
include a detailed description of the
nature of the events and, if relevant and
available, we recommend including a
range of patient age and weight and a
breakdown of patient gender, race, and
ethnicity.
• SECTION D.1: Brand Name.
• SECTION D.2 and D.2.b: Common
Device Name and Product Code. Include
the common name of the device and
Product Classification Code (Procode).
• SECTION D.3: Manufacturer Name,
City, and State.
• SECTION D.4: Device
Identification—Enter the model and/or
catalog number and lot number(s) and/
or serial number(s) for the devices that
are the subject of the MDR. Include any
device identifier (DI) portion of the
unique device identifier (UDI) for the
device version or model that is the
subject of the MDR.
• SECTION G.1: Contact Office (and
Manufacturing Site(s) for Devices)—
Enter the name, address, and email of
the manufacturer reporting site (contact
office), including the contact name for
the summary report being submitted.
Enter the name and address of the
manufacturing site(s) for the device, if
different from the contact office.
• SECTION G.2: Phone Number of
Contact Office.
• SECTION G.5: Combination
Products—If applicable, indicate that
the report involves a combination
product (see section IV.E.).
• SECTION H.1: Type of Reportable
Event—Check ‘‘Malfunction’’ in this
box.
• SECTION H.6: Event Problem and
Evaluation Codes—
Æ Enter the device problem code(s).
(See Appendix A for case examples of
how to report (Ref. 6).)
Æ Enter the evaluation code(s) for the
following categories: Method, Results,
Conclusion.
Æ Enter a Conclusion Code, even if
the device was not evaluated.
• SECTION H.10: Additional
Manufacturer Narrative—Provide a
summary of the results of the
investigation for the reported
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40983
malfunctions, including any follow up
actions taken, and any additional
information that would be helpful in
understanding how the manufacturer
addressed the malfunction events
summarized in the report. Enter a
breakdown of the malfunction events
summarized in the report, including the
number of devices that were returned,
the number of devices that were labeled
‘‘for single use’’ (if any), and the number
of devices that were reprocessed and
reused (if any).
E. Combination Product Considerations
As noted in the response to comment
17 above, device-led combination
products are included in this alternative
that we are granting under § 803.19 to
permit voluntary malfunction summary
reporting. The eMDR data system and
instructions support use of the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program for device-led
combination products. However, as
discussed in response to comment 17
above, additional considerations need to
be addressed before drug and biologicled combination products could be
included in the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program. As noted
in Response 17, the Agency intends to
delay enforcement of the malfunction
reporting requirements for drug and
biologic-led combination products
under the PMSR final rule. FDA will
consider the relevant comments
received on the 2017 Proposal, as well
as any additional, relevant comments
relating to malfunction reporting for
drug and biologic-led combination
products submitted in relation to the
PMSR draft guidance in developing an
approach for voluntary malfunction
summary reporting for such
combination products.
F. Submission Schedule and Logistics
Manufacturers submitting
malfunction summary reports or
supplemental reports to a malfunction
summary report must use electronic
reporting (Ref. 10) to submit those
reports on a quarterly basis according to
the schedule in table 1. The summary
malfunction report must include the
MDR Number, which consists of the
registration number of the manufacturer,
the year in which the event is being
reported, and a 5-digit sequence
number. Information included in a
malfunction summary report must be
current as of the last date of the
quarterly timeframe identified in the
first column of table 1.
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
40984
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—SUMMARY MALFUNCTION REPORTING SCHEDULE
Reportable malfunctions or supplemental information that you become aware of during these timeframes:
Must be submitted to FDA
by:
January 1–March 31 .......................................................................................................................................................
April 1–June 30 ...............................................................................................................................................................
July 1–September 30 ......................................................................................................................................................
October 1–December 31 ................................................................................................................................................
April 30.
July 31.
October 31.
January 31.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
The Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program applies only to
reportable malfunction events that
manufacturers become aware of on or
after August 17, 2018. The deadline for
FDA accepting the first round of
quarterly reports for this program is
October 31, 2018.
Under §§ 803.17 and 803.18,
manufacturers are required to develop,
maintain, and implement written MDR
procedures and establish and maintain
MDR event files, and those requirements
remain applicable for manufacturers
that elect to participate in this program.
Among other things, a manufacturer
must develop, maintain, and implement
MDR procedures that provide for timely
transmission of complete MDRs to FDA.
(See § 803.17(a)(3)). Manufacturers
participating in the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program will need to update their
internal MDR processes and procedures
to provide for submitting summary
malfunction reports within the
Summary Malfunction Reporting
Schedule.
V. Implementation Strategy
The goal of the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program is to
permit manufacturers of devices under
certain product codes to report
malfunctions on a quarterly basis and in
a summary format, as outlined in the
MDUFA IV Commitment Letter (Ref. 1),
in a manner that provides for effective
monitoring of devices and is beneficial
for FDA, industry, and the public. An
important part of this voluntary program
is providing clarification to
manufacturers regarding the product
codes eligible for the program.
Consistent with the MDUFA IV
Commitment Letter (Ref. 1), FDA has
identified eligible product codes for the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program in FDA’s Product
Classification Database, available on
FDA’s website, as part of granting the
alternative (see https://
www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/
cfdocs/cfPCD/classification.cfm).
Manufacturers that choose to participate
in quarterly, summary reporting through
this program will remain responsible for
complying with applicable MDR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
requirements under part 803 (e.g.,
requirements to establish and maintain
MDR event files under § 803.18) and QS
requirements under part 820 (21 CFR
part 820) (e.g., the requirement to
evaluate, review, and investigate any
complaint that represents an MDR
reportable event under § 820.198).
If FDA determines that individual
malfunction reports are necessary from
a specific manufacturer or for specific
devices, FDA will notify relevant
manufacturers that they must submit
individual reports and provide an
explanation for that decision and, as
appropriate, the steps necessary to
return to summary, quarterly reporting.
The Agency also notes that, under
§ 803.19(d), it may revoke or modify in
writing an exemption, variance, or
alternative reporting requirement if it
determines that revocation or
modification is necessary to protect the
public health.
VI. Updating Product Codes for
Inclusion Into the Program
FDA recognizes that new product
codes will be created after the date of
granting the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program alternative
under § 803.19. In general, FDA does
not intend to consider devices under
product codes in existence for less than
2 years to be eligible for the program,
unless the new product code was issued
solely for administrative reasons. Any
product code in existence after the
publication date will be initially
ineligible to participate in the program.
However, FDA will periodically
evaluate new product codes after they
have been in existence for 2 years to
determine whether they should be
added to the list of product codes
eligible for the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program. If FDA
determines that a new product code
should be added, then it will grant
manufacturers of devices within that
product code the same alternative under
§ 803.19 for malfunction events
associated with those devices and
update FDA’s Product Classification
database accordingly to reflect the
changes.
Manufacturers can send a request for
a product code to be added to the list
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
of eligible product codes and for
manufacturers of devices within that
product code to be granted the same
alternative for malfunction events
associated with those devices to the
MDRPolicy@fda.hhs.gov mailbox. You
may also mail your written request to
MDR Policy Branch, Division of
Postmarket Surveillance, Office of
Surveillance and Biometrics, Center for
Devices and Radiological Health, 10903
New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm.
3217, Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002.
VII. Conclusion
In accordance with section
519(a)(1)(B)(i) of the FD&C Act and
§ 803.19, FDA is granting the alternative
described in section IV to manufacturers
of devices in eligible product codes, as
identified in the FDA Product
Classification Database (https://
www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/
cfdocs/cfPCD/classification.cfm) on
August 17, 2018. FDA believes that for
the devices in eligible product codes,
quarterly, summary reporting in
accordance with the conditions of the
alternative will be as effective as the
current MDR regulatory requirements
for purposes of identifying and
monitoring potential device safety
concerns and device malfunctions. The
Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program will allow
manufacturers to submit summary
reports with event narratives that will
help FDA more efficiently process
malfunction reports and identify
malfunction trends. In addition, FDA’s
determination of product code
eligibility and the conditions of
participation in the program will require
submission of individual 30-day or 5day malfunction reports in
circumstances where such reports are
necessary to protect public health.
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.30(h) 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.
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 160 / Friday, August 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
The Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program described in this
Notice contains information collection
provisions that 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).
These provisions have been approved
under OMB control number 0910–0437.
This document also refers to
previously approved collections of
information. These collections of
information are subject to review by the
OMB under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520). The collections of information in
part 4, subpart B, regarding
postmarketing safety reporting for
combination products have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0834; the collections of
information in part 803, regarding
medical device reporting, have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0437; the collections of
information in 806, regarding
corrections and removals, have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0359; the collections of
information in 21 CFR part 807, subpart
E, regarding premarket notification,
have been approved under OMB control
number 0910–0120; the collections of
information in 21 CFR part 814,
subparts A through E, regarding
premarket approval, have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0231; the collections of
information in 21 CFR part 810,
regarding medical device recall
authority, have been approved under
OMB control number 0910–0432; the
collections of information in part 820,
regarding quality system regulations,
have been approved under OMB control
number 0910–0073; the collections of
information in 21 CFR parts 1002
through 1050, regarding radiological
health, have been approved under OMB
control number 0910–0025; the
collections of information regarding the
MedWatch: The Food and Drug
Administration Medical Products
Reporting Program have been approved
under OMB control number 0910–0291;
and the collections of information
regarding the Adverse Event Program for
Medical Devices (Medical Product
Safety Network (MedSun)) have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0471.
X. References
The following references are on
display in the Dockets Management
Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852 and are available
for viewing by interested persons
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Aug 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday; they are also available
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov. FDA has verified
the website addresses, as of the date this
document publishes in the Federal
Register, but websites are subject to
change over time.
1. Medical Device User Fee Agreement IV
Commitment Letter, available at https://
www.fda.gov/downloads/ForIndustry/
UserFees/MedicalDeviceUserFee/
UCM535548.pdf.
2. Food and Drug Administration, ‘‘Medical
Device Reporting—Alternative Summary
Reporting (ASR) Program; Guidance for
Industry,’’ (October 19, 2000); available
at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/
MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulation
andGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/
ucm072102.pdf.
3. Food and Drug Administration, ‘‘Medical
Device Reporting for Manufacturers;
Guidance for Industry and Food and
Drug Administration Staff,’’ (November
8, 2016); available at https://
www.fda.gov/downloads/
medicaldevices/deviceregulationand
guidance/guidancedocuments/
ucm359566.pdf.
4. Food and Drug Administration, ‘‘Center for
Devices and Radiological Health Appeals
Processes; Guidance for Industry and
Food and Drug Administration Staff,’’
(May 17, 2013); available at https://
www.fda.gov/downloads/
MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationand
Guidance/GuidanceDocuments/
UCM284670.pdf.
5. Food and Drug Administration,
‘‘International Medical Device Regulators
Forum,’’ available at https://
www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/
InternationalPrograms/IMDRF/
default.htm.
6. Appendix A, ‘‘Case Examples of Summary
Malfunction Reporting,’’ available in
Docket No. FDA–2017–N–6730.
7. Food and Drug Administration,
‘‘Postmarketing Safety Reporting for
Combination Products; Draft Guidance
for Industry and Food and Drug
Administration Staff,’’ (March 2018);
available at https://www.fda.gov/
downloads/RegulatoryInformation/
Guidances/UCM601454.pdf.
8. Food and Drug Administration,
‘‘Compliance Policy for Combination
Product Postmarketing Safety Reporting,
Immediately in Effect Guidance for
Industry and Food and Drug
Administration Staff,’’ available at
https://www.fda.gov/Regulatory
Information/Guidances/ucm601456.htm.
9. Food and Drug Administration, Form FDA
3500A, available at https://www.fda.gov/
downloads/aboutfda/reportsmanuals
forms/forms/ucm048334.pdf. 5.
10. Electronic Medical Device Reporting
(eMDR) (manufacturers may obtain
information on how to prepare and
submit reports in an electronic format
that FDA can process, review, and
archive), available at: https://
www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/
FDAeSubmitter/ucm107903.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40985
Dated: August 13, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018–17770 Filed 8–16–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2018–0775]
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Columbia River, Portland, OR and
Vancouver, WA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of deviation from
drawbridge regulation.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard has issued a
temporary deviation from the operating
schedule that governs the Interstate 5 (I–
5) Bridges across the Columbia River,
mile 106.5, between Portland, Oregon,
and Vancouver, Washington. The
deviation is necessary to facilitate the
presence of participants in the Hands
Across the Bridge Project. This
deviation allows the bridges to remain
in the closed-to-navigation position
during the event.
DATES: This deviation is effective from
11 a.m. to 2 p.m. on September 3, 2018.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
deviation, USCG–2018–0775 is available
at https://www.regulations.gov. Type the
docket number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box
and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated
with this deviation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this temporary
deviation, call or email Mr. Steven
Fischer, Bridge Administrator,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District;
telephone 206–220–7282, email d13-pfd13bridges@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Oregon
Department of Transportation (bridge
owner) requested a temporary deviation
from the operating schedule for the I–5
Bridges, mile 106.5, across the Columbia
River between Vancouver, WA, and
Portland, OR, to facilitate safe passage of
participants in the Hands Across the
Bridge Project. The I–5 Bridges provides
three designated navigation channels
with vertical clearances ranging from 39
to 72 feet above Columbia River Datum
0.0 while the lift spans are in the closedto-navigation position. The normal
operating schedule for the I–5 Bridges is
33 CFR 117.869. The subject bridges
need not open to marine vessels during
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 160 (Friday, August 17, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40973-40985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17770]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 803
[Docket No. FDA-2017-N-6730]
Medical Devices and Device-Led Combination Products; Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting Program for Manufacturers
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notification; order granting alternative.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA, Agency, or we) Center
for Devices and Radiological Health and Center for Biologics Evaluation
and Research are announcing that the Agency is granting an alternative
that permits manufacturer reporting of certain device malfunction
medical device reports (MDRs) in summary form on a quarterly basis. We
refer to this alternative as the ``Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program.'' This voluntary program reflects goals for
streamlining malfunction reporting outlined in the commitment letter
agreed to by FDA and industry and submitted to Congress, as referenced
in the Medical Device User Fee Amendments of 2017 (MDUFA IV Commitment
Letter).
DATES: This voluntary program applies only to reportable malfunction
events that manufacturers become aware of on or after August 17, 2018.
See further discussion in section IV.F. ``Submission Schedule and
Logistics.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Rios, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health (CDRH), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3222, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-
6107, [email protected]; or Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 240-402-
7911; or CBER, Office of Communication, Outreach, and Development
(OCOD), 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD
20993-0002; or by calling 1-800-835-4709 or 240-402-8010; or email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Every year, FDA receives hundreds of thousands of MDRs of suspected
device-associated deaths, serious injuries, and malfunctions. The
Agency's MDR program is one of the postmarket surveillance tools FDA
uses to monitor device performance, detect potential device-related
safety issues, and contribute to benefit-risk assessments. Malfunction
reports represent a substantial fraction of the MDRs FDA receives on an
annual basis.
Medical device reporting requirements for manufacturers are set
forth in section 519 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C
Act) (21 U.S.C. 360i) and the regulations contained in part 803 (21 CFR
part 803). Among other things, part 803 requires the submission of an
individual MDR when a manufacturer becomes aware of information, from
any source, which reasonably suggests that one of its marketed devices
malfunctioned and the malfunction of the device or a similar device
marketed by the manufacturer would be likely to cause or contribute to
a death or serious injury if the malfunction were to recur (Sec. Sec.
803.10(c)(1) and 803.50(a)(2). Throughout this document, we refer to
such malfunctions as ``reportable malfunctions'' or ``reportable
malfunction events.''
The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA)
[[Page 40974]]
(Pub. L. 110-85) amended section 519(a) of the FD&C Act related to the
reporting of device malfunctions. FDAAA did not alter the malfunction
reporting requirements for class III devices and those class II devices
that are permanently implantable, life supporting, or life sustaining.
Under section 519(a)(1)(B)(i) of the FD&C Act, as amended by FDAAA,
manufacturers of those devices must continue to submit malfunction
reports in accordance with part 803 (or successor regulations), unless
FDA grants an exemption or variance from, or an alternative to, a
requirement under such regulations under Sec. [thinsp]803.19. However,
FDAAA amended the FD&C Act to require that malfunction MDRs for class I
and those class II devices that are not permanently implantable, life
supporting, or life sustaining--other than any type of class I or II
device that FDA has, by notice, published in the Federal Register or by
letter to the person who is the manufacturer or importer of the device,
indicated should be subject to part 803 in order to protect the public
health--be submitted in accordance with the criteria established by
FDA. The criteria require the malfunction reports to be in summary form
and made on a quarterly basis (section 519(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the FD&C
Act). In the Federal Register of March 8, 2011 (76 FR 12743), FDA
explained that, pending further notice from the Agency, all class I
devices and those class II devices that are not permanently
implantable, life supporting, or life sustaining would remain subject
to individual reporting requirements under part 803 to protect the
public health, pursuant to section 519(a)(1)(B)(i)(III) of the FD&C
Act. Consequently, unless granted an exemption, variance, or
alternative, manufacturers of those devices have continued to be
required to submit individual malfunction reports under part 803. Under
Sec. 803.19, FDA may grant exemptions or variances from, or
alternatives to, any or all of the reporting requirements in part 803,
and may change the frequency of reporting to quarterly, semiannually,
annually, or other appropriate time period. FDA may grant such
modifications upon request or at its discretion, and when granting such
modifications, FDA may impose other reporting requirements to ensure
the protection of the public health. (See Sec. 803.19(c))
In the Federal Register of December 26, 2017 (82 FR 60922), FDA
issued a notification outlining FDA's proposal to grant an alternative
under Sec. 803.19 to permit manufacturer reporting of certain device
malfunctions in summary form on a quarterly basis, subject to certain
conditions, and requested comments (2017 Proposal). As explained in the
2017 Proposal, the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program is
intended to reflect goals for streamlining malfunction reporting that
FDA and industry agreed to in the MDUFA IV Commitment Letter (Ref. 1).
The 2017 Proposal also summarized FDA's previous experience with
summary reporting programs, key findings from an FDA pilot program for
the submission of MDRs in summary format on a quarterly basis (see 80
FR 50010, August 18, 2015), additional background regarding the
development of the proposal, and the anticipated benefits of summary
reporting under the proposal. Interested persons were given the
opportunity to submit comments by February 26, 2018.
II. Comments on the Proposed Alternative and FDA's Response
In response to the 2017 Proposal, FDA received 24 comments from
industry, professional societies, trade organizations, and individual
consumers by the close of the comment period, each containing one or
more comments on one or more issues. A summary of the comments to the
docket and our responses follow. To make it easier to identify comments
and our responses, the word ``Comment'' appears in parentheses before
the comment's description, and the word ``Response'' in parentheses
precedes the response. The comments are grouped based on common themes
and numbered sequentially.
A. General Comments
(Comment 1) Three comments suggested that the proposal was
inconsistent with amendments made by section 227 of FDAAA to section
519(a) of the FD&C Act regarding malfunction reporting requirements.
Two of these comments specifically recommended that FDA immediately
implement summary, quarterly malfunction reporting under section
519(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the FD&C Act for all class I devices and those
class II devices that are not permanently implantable, life supporting,
or life sustaining.
(Response 1) FDA disagrees with these comments. As discussed in the
2017 Proposal, currently, there are still reportable malfunctions for
which submission of individual malfunction reports on a prompter basis
than quarterly is necessary to protect the public health--for example,
when remedial action is needed to prevent an unreasonable risk of
substantial harm to the public health. Those situations may involve
class I devices and class II devices that are not permanently
implantable, life supporting, or life sustaining, and it is not
feasible for FDA to provide notice in the Federal Register or by letter
to individual manufacturers, pursuant to section 519(a)(1)(B)(i)(III)
of the FD&C Act, each time one of these situations arises. For example,
FDA may not become aware of the situation until it receives an MDR from
a manufacturer. Therefore, in accordance with section
519(a)(1)(B)(i)(III) of the FD&C Act, manufacturers of class I devices
and those class II devices that are not permanently implantable, life
supporting, or life sustaining remain subject to individual reporting
requirements in part 803, unless granted an exemption, variance, or
alternative, to protect the public health. However, FDA does believe
that malfunction summary reporting on a quarterly basis, in accordance
with the conditions described in section IV, will reduce burden on FDA
and manufacturers and allow FDA to effectively monitor many devices.
Accordingly, the Agency is granting an alternative under section
519(a)(1)(B)(i) of the FD&C Act and Sec. 803.19 to permit
manufacturers of those devices to submit summary, quarterly malfunction
reports, with certain conditions.
(Comment 2) Several comments raised concerns that the proposed
program would be unable to provide FDA with critical information on
adverse event reporting. Many of the comments from individual consumers
also raised concerns that the proposed program would limit transparency
of malfunction event data that is publicly available to patients and
physicians, including transparency regarding the number of reported
malfunctions. However, another comment indicated that the proposed
program would minimize burden while maintaining patient safety. That
same comment further indicated that the proposed malfunction summary
reporting format would enhance public visibility into the events and
associated investigation compared to a format previously used for the
Alternative Summary Reporting (ASR) program.
(Response 2) FDA disagrees with the comments suggesting that the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program will negatively affect
patient safety and the transparency of malfunction reports. Summary,
quarterly reporting in accordance with this program will result in some
malfunction reports being submitted to FDA and added to the publicly
available Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE)
database later
[[Page 40975]]
than this occurs under FDA's current individual reporting requirements.
However, as explained in our 2017 Proposal, we believe this reporting
format and schedule will also yield benefits for FDA and the public,
such as helping FDA process malfunction reports more efficiently and
helping both FDA and the public more readily identify malfunction
trends.
While summary malfunction reports submitted under this program will
change the format in which information is presented to FDA, we do not
believe there will be an adverse impact on the content of information
provided to FDA. The format for summary reporting described in section
IV.D includes a narrative section for describing malfunctions, similar
to the narrative section required for individual reporting. In
addition, each narrative section is required to include a sentence
specifying the number of malfunction events summarized in the report,
providing transparency for the public regarding the number of events
that a summary report available in MAUDE represents. Therefore, we
agree with the comment that the summary reporting format will improve
transparency for the public when compared to some past summary reports
submitted to FDA, such as reports submitted under the ASR program (Ref.
2).
(Comment 3) One comment requested clarification as to whether a
manufacturer would need to apply or obtain permission to participate in
the program and asked FDA to clarify how the proposed program would
work with other alternative summary reporting situations. Another
comment asked FDA to clarify whether manufacturers can still apply for
an exemption or variance to be granted under Sec. 803.19 for their
devices that do not fall under an eligible product code.
(Response 3) FDA is clarifying in the description of the
alternative that manufacturers do not need to submit a request or
application to FDA before participating in the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program. For devices that fall within eligible
product codes, the alternative that FDA is granting under Sec. 803.19
provides that manufacturers may choose or ``self-elect'' to
participate, subject to the program conditions identified in section
IV. If a manufacturer wishes to request a different exemption,
variance, or alternative under Sec. 803.19 (including for devices in
product codes that are eligible for the Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program) the manufacturer may submit a request to FDA. For
more information regarding the recommended content of such requests,
see section 2.27 of the Agency's guidance entitled ``Medical Device
Reporting for Manufacturers: Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug
Administration Staff'' (MDR Guidance) (Ref. 3).
Whether participation in the Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program will have an impact on a manufacturer being granted a
different exemption, variance, or alternative under Sec. 803.19 will
depend on the scope of the other exemption, variance, or alternative.
FDA will make a case-by-case determination on requests for an
exemption, variance, or alternative submitted under Sec. 803.19(b).
B. Scope of Program
(Comment 4) Several comments also discussed the scope of product
codes that should be eligible for the proposed program. One comment
expressed concern about including class III devices and class II
devices that are permanently implantable, life-supporting, or life-
sustaining in the program and urged FDA to issue another Federal
Register notice with the list of eligible product codes for these
categories of devices for public comment before allowing summary,
quarterly malfunction reporting for those devices. In contrast, another
comment asserted that all devices should be eligible for malfunction
summary reporting, unless there is an express determination, subject to
public input, that permitting summary reporting for a device would
present public health concerns. Other comments recommended that all
device product codes should be eligible for summary, quarterly
malfunction reporting, with the exception of product codes for class
III devices and class II devices that are permanently implantable, life
supporting, or life sustaining when those product codes have been in
existence for less than 2 years.
(Response 4) FDA disagrees that it should publish another Federal
Register notice for public comment listing product codes that would be
eligible or ineligible for the program. Among other reasons, the Agency
expressly requested comment on the product codes that should be
eligible for the proposed program, and many commenters submitted
proposed lists of eligible product codes or identified specific devices
about which they had concerns. FDA has considered these comments and
has also conducted an extensive review of all product codes, regardless
of device class, to determine whether each product code would be
eligible. In addition, consistent with its 2017 Proposal, product codes
that have been in existence for less than 2 years are not included in
the list of eligible product codes, unless the new product code was
created solely for administrative reasons. In FDA's experience, this 2-
year period is an important period for having more timely, detailed
information to monitor malfunction events. That 2-year timeframe for
new product codes is also consistent with the MDUFA IV Commitment
Letter (Ref. 1).
(Comment 5) Three comments recommended that importers be included
within the scope of the proposed program and indicated that FDA should
provide a rationale for not including them. One of those comments
suggested that without more information, it appeared arbitrary that FDA
did not include importers and user facilities in the summary reporting
program.
(Response 5) FDA disagrees with these comments. Unlike
manufacturers, device user facilities are not required to submit
malfunction reports under part 803. User facilities, such as hospitals
or nursing homes, are required to submit MDRs to FDA and/or the
manufacturer only for reportable death or serious injury events. (See
section 519(b) of the FD&C Act; Sec. 803.30(a)).
Importers are also subject to different requirements for reporting
device malfunctions than those for manufacturers under part 803. Under
Sec. 803.40, importers are required to submit a report to the device
manufacturer, not to FDA, within 30 days after becoming aware of a
reportable malfunction event. Manufacturers then determine the
reportability of the information received from the importer and
accordingly submit those reports to FDA. This program specifically
addresses malfunction summary reporting to FDA. In addition, we believe
it is important for importers to continue to submit individual
malfunction MDRs to device manufacturers in accordance with Sec.
803.40 so that manufacturers receive detailed information necessary to
conduct adequate investigations and follow up related to malfunction
events.
C. Individual Reporting Conditions
(Comment 6) One comment suggested that when requesting that a
manufacturer submit a 5-day report, FDA should have an objective and
documented basis for making such a request, as well as an opportunity
for manufacturers to appeal. Other comments asked FDA to define the
term ``substantially similar'' as used in describing the program
condition regarding 5-day reports and to clarify
[[Page 40976]]
what constitutes an ``imminent hazard'' and whether this is analogous
to reportable malfunctions requiring a 5-day report.
(Response 6) The circumstances in which a 5-day report is required
are defined under Sec. 803.53, and those circumstances remain
unchanged for manufacturers participating in the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program. As stated in the 2017 Proposal, the
reporting requirements at Sec. 803.53 will continue to apply to
manufacturers of devices in eligible product codes who participate in
this program. We have added a separate heading to the description of
the alternative to clarify this point further. For more information
regarding the handling of a 5-day report, please see section 2.20 of
the Agency's MDR Guidance (Ref. 3).
The first individual reporting condition requires that if a
manufacturer submits a 5-day report for an event or events that require
remedial action to prevent an unreasonable risk of substantial harm to
public health, all subsequent reportable malfunctions of the same
nature that involve substantially similar devices must be submitted as
individual MDRs in accordance with Sec. Sec. 803.50 and 803.52 until
the date that the remedial action has been resolved to FDA's
satisfaction. For purposes of this individual reporting condition, a
``substantially similar'' device could be, for example, a device that
is the same except for certain performance characteristics or a device
that is the same except for certain cosmetic differences in color or
shape.
Regarding the term ``imminent hazard,'' FDA notes that the term is
used to describe one of the general overarching principles for summary
reporting, but is not included in the descriptions of any of the
individual reporting conditions. For purposes of these overarching
principles, we intend ``imminent hazard'' to capture situations in
which a device poses a significant risk to health and creates a public
health situation that should be addressed immediately to prevent
injury. Use of that term in one of the overarching principles was not
intended to indicate any change in the standard for a 5-day report
under Sec. 803.53.
(Comment 7) One comment indicated that there should be objective
and documented criteria for when FDA would provide written notice that
manufacturers must submit an individual, 30-day malfunction report in
accordance with the proposed program conditions, along with an
opportunity for appeal. The comment further asserted that due process
considerations need to be made regarding these reporting requirements,
including notice, a written justification for the request, and a
process to appeal.
(Response 7) FDA disagrees that there should be fixed criteria for
notifying a manufacturer that it must submit an individual, 30-day
malfunction report in accordance with the program conditions.
Manufacturers who are notified to submit individual reports in
accordance with the individual reporting conditions will need to comply
with MDR requirements to which they would otherwise be subject if not
granted this alternative under Sec. 803.19. FDA has provided examples
of when it would make these notifications, but public health issues
that require submission of individual MDRs to monitor device safety are
not uniform and may arise in various ways.
FDA will provide written notice to manufacturers when they need to
submit individual MDRs pursuant to individual reporting conditions 3
and 4, as described in section IV.B. In addition, the Agency already
has a process in place for stakeholders to request review of decisions
made by CDRH employees. For more information, refer to the FDA Guidance
entitled ``Center for Devices and Radiological Health Appeals
Processes'' (Ref. 4).
(Comment 8) Some comments disagreed with the proposed program
condition that would have required manufacturers to submit individual,
30-day MDRs for reportable malfunction events that are the subject of
any ongoing device recall and suggested that the condition be modified
or removed. The comments cited several different reasons for objecting
to this condition, including that the condition is not mentioned in the
MDUFA IV Commitment Letter, that the condition may discourage
manufacturers from conducting voluntary or class III recalls, that the
condition is duplicative of information that FDA receives during a
recall, and that it may be difficult for manufacturers to manage the
requirements (e.g., new events may be uncovered during a product
investigation leading to confusion and multiple reports for the same
incident). Suggestions from the commenters regarding this individual
reporting condition included the following: (a) The condition should
only apply to mandatory or FDA-initiated recalls, and summary reporting
should be permitted for voluntary or low-risk class III recalls and for
incidents related to remedial action after the first (parent) MDR is
submitted, unless a death or serious injury is associated; (b) FDA
should clarify how to handle malfunction events that were not submitted
as individual MDRs, but subsequently, prior to the next summary
reporting date, are identified to be the result of an issue addressed
by a recall; (c) the timeframe for submitting individual MDRs should be
changed from 90 days past the date of the termination of the recall to
90 days past the date of the recall; and (d) FDA should clarify what it
means by ``malfunction events of the same nature.''
(Response 8) FDA disagrees with the comments recommending removal
of this individual reporting condition. Recall classification takes
into account both the severity of harm and the likelihood of
occurrence, and it is important for FDA to have access to more timely
information on malfunctions related to certain recalls to ensure that
the recall has been appropriately classified and that the recall
strategy is effective.
FDA also provides the following responses to the additional
specific issues raised in the comments: (a) For the reasons discussed
above, FDA continues to believe that it is important for malfunctions
related to certain recalls to be reported as individual MDRs. However,
after considering the comments, FDA has determined that this individual
reporting condition should only apply to reportable malfunctions that
are the subject of a recall involving a correction or removal that must
be reported to FDA under part 806 (21 CFR part 806). Under part 806,
manufacturers and importers are required to make a written report to
FDA of any correction or removal of a device if the correction or
removal was initiated to reduce a risk to health posed by the device or
to remedy a violation of the FD&C Act caused by the device that may
present a risk to health, unless the information has already been
submitted to FDA in accordance with other reporting requirements. (See
Sec. 806.10(a) and (f).) Because the definition of ``risk to health''
under part 806 tracks the definitions of class I and class II recalls
in Sec. 7.3(m) (21 CFR 7.3(m)), reports of corrections and removals
are required for actions that meet the definition of class I and class
II recalls. However, under part 806, manufacturers and importers need
not report events that are categorized as class III recalls under Sec.
7.3(m) (see 62 FR 27183, May 19, 1997). Therefore, an action that meets
the definition of a class III recall would not, on its own, trigger the
requirement to submit individual reports under the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting Program.
[[Page 40977]]
(b) FDA agrees that it is important to provide clarity regarding
when the requirement to submit individual MDRs is triggered under this
individual reporting condition and the events to which that requirement
applies. Therefore, FDA is revising the alternative to clarify that, as
of the date a manufacturer submits a required report of a correction or
removal under part 806 (or the date that the manufacturer submits a
report of the correction or removal under 21 CFR part 803 or part 1004
instead, as permitted under Sec. 806.10(f)), the manufacturer must
submit reportable malfunction events related to that correction or
removal as individual MDRs in accordance with Sec. Sec. 803.50 and
803.52. We believe these revisions will help provide manufacturers with
a clear date on which this individual reporting obligation is
triggered.
With respect to malfunction events that were identified for
inclusion in a summary report but are subsequently identified as the
subject of a reportable correction or removal prior to the end of the
relevant summary reporting period, FDA is revising the alternative to
state that a summary MDR must be submitted for those reportable
malfunctions within 30 calendar days of when the manufacturer submits
the required report of correction or removal. In the summary report,
the manufacturer must include a check on the box for ``Recall'' in
SECTION H.7 of the electronic Form FDA 3500A. We have similarly revised
the description of individual reporting conditions 3 and 4 to clarify
the requirements for handling malfunction events identified for
inclusion in a summary report (but not yet submitted) prior to the date
that individual reporting is triggered.
(c) As part of its recall termination process, FDA considers MDR
information, including reported malfunctions to help evaluate the
effectiveness of the recall. Therefore, FDA disagrees with the
suggestion to limit the duration of individual reporting under this
condition to 90 days past the date of a recall. However, after
considering the comments, we do not believe it is necessary to receive
individual MDRs for reportable malfunction events that are the subject
of a recall after FDA has terminated the recall. We have revised the
alternative accordingly (see Section IV.B.2.). For similar reasons, we
have revised the first individual reporting condition to state that
individual MDRs associated with a 5-day report are only required until
the remedial action at issue is resolved to FDA's satisfaction.
(d) By ``malfunction events of the same nature,'' FDA means
additional reportable malfunction events involving the same malfunction
that prompted the recall.
(Comment 9) One comment, regarding proposed individual reporting
condition 3, suggested that FDA provide information on the timing for
when the Agency will provide written notice to a manufacturer that the
manufacturer can resume participation in the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program.
(Response 9) FDA cannot provide a uniform timeframe for when the
Agency would notify manufacturers submitting individual reports due to
an identified public health issue that they can resume submission of
summary, quarterly malfunction reports for those devices because the
timing and resolution of public health issues is specific to each
situation.
(Comment 10) Three comments recommended that FDA clarify what
constitutes a ``new type of reportable malfunction'' that is exempt
from summary reporting. One of these comments indicated that FDA should
provide additional information regarding when a manufacturer can begin
submitting summary reports for these new types of device malfunctions.
(Response 10) FDA disagrees that the meaning of the phrase ``new
type of reportable malfunction'' was unclear in the proposal.
Manufacturers are required under Sec. 820.198 (21 CFR 820.198) to
evaluate complaints to determine if they represent events that must be
reported to FDA under part 803 or if an investigation is required.
Through this process, if a manufacturer identifies a new type of
reportable malfunction that has not previously been reported to FDA
over the life of that device, this information must be submitted to FDA
as an individual MDR in accordance with Sec. Sec. 803.50 and 803.52
and may not be reported to FDA in a summary malfunction report. This
will allow FDA and manufacturers to better understand and address
emergent issues with medical devices. We have revised this individual
reporting condition to clarify that after manufacturers submit an
individual MDR for the initial occurrence of a previously unreported
type of reportable malfunction for a device, subsequent reports for
that same type of malfunction for that device may be in summary form,
unless they are subject to individual reporting for another reason.
D. Reporting Format
(Comment 11) Some comments suggested that FDA allow manufacturers
to ``bundle together'' reportable malfunction events in a summary
report by product code or product family and allow the use of
International Medical Device Regulators Forum's (IMDRF) Level 1,2 codes
to bundle like events in a summary report.
(Response 11) FDA disagrees with the suggestion that manufacturers
be permitted to bundle reportable malfunction events by product code or
product family for purposes of submitting a summary report. Each unique
combination of device brand name (corresponding to SECTION D1 of the
Form FDA 3500A), device model, and device problem code(s)
(corresponding to SECTION F10/H6 of the Form FDA 3500A) can be
summarized together in reports submitted under this program. (Comments
regarding the number of brand names that should be included in each
summary report are further addressed in the response to Comment 16
below, and we have made corrections to the summary reporting
instructions for SECTION D.4 to be clear that each summary malfunction
report should summarize events for a single device model.) Bundling
together malfunction reports by product codes or device families would
make summarizing and interpreting the information in a summary report
difficult for manufacturers, FDA, and the public because a product code
or product family could contain several devices with different
functions, components, and modes of operation that are important for
purposes of understanding malfunction events and the causes of those
events. The intent of the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program is to streamline reporting of events that are the same or
similar, yet not to over bundle reports such that important details
regarding device performance are obscured.
The IMDRF (Ref. 5) is working towards harmonization of all medical
device coding, including device problem codes. To harmonize medical
device coding globally, device problem codes have been organized in a
hierarchical arrangement, such that higher level codes (e.g.,
electrical issue) describe more general device problems, while lower
level codes (e.g., insulation issue) provide more granularity into the
type of device problem described. For purposes of grouping device
issues for reports submitted under this Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program, we recommend that all coding
[[Page 40978]]
be grouped at the lowest level of coding available, when IMDRF codes
are available. Based on our experience, FDA does not believe grouping
by the lowest level of coding will eliminate the efficiency benefits of
summary reporting. FDA does not specify a specific level of coding, but
expects the most specific appropriate code to be used.
(Comment 12) One comment noted that it was unclear whether a
summary malfunction report will be available in MAUDE or another
database. Another comment recommended that FDA allow Excel spreadsheets
with malfunction report data to be uploaded to MAUDE.
(Response 12) FDA plans to make summary reports submitted under the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program publicly available in
MAUDE. However, FDA will not upload Excel spreadsheets to MAUDE because
they are incompatible with the MAUDE interface.
(Comment 13) One comment indicated that FDA should consider
amending the requirement that an individual process the complaints
twice--once for reporting assessment and then quarterly.
(Response 13) FDA disagrees with this comment. FDA is granting an
alternative to the individual reporting requirements under part 803 for
certain reportable malfunction events. The Quality System (QS)
regulation requires manufacturers to evaluate all complaints to
determine if they represent events that must be reported to FDA under
part 803 (Sec. 820.198(a)). If a complaint represents an MDR
reportable event, then the manufacturer must, among other things,
investigate it and submit an MDR to FDA. (See Sec. Sec. 803.10(c),
803.50, and 820.198(d)) The difference for manufacturers that have been
granted the alternative described in this document is that they could
choose to report certain malfunction events to FDA as a summary report
instead of as an individual report.
(Comment 14) One comment requested that FDA provide more detail
concerning the terms ``similar device'' and ``similar complaint,'' as
used in the discussion of the rationale for the proposed summary
reporting format.
(Response 14) The term ``similar device'' is used in FDA's MDR
regulations to describe malfunction events for which manufacturers must
submit a report to FDA. (see e.g., Sec. 803.50(a)(2)) As used in this
alternative, the term ``similar device'' is intended to have the same
meaning as it does for purposes of part 803. FDA's MDR Guidance (Ref.
3), provides more information regarding the factors that FDA and
manufacturers may consider in determining if a device is ``similar'' to
another device.
FDA does not believe it is necessary to provide a formal definition
of the term ``similar complaint'' for purposes of this alternative
because that term is not used in describing any of the conditions of
the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program, including the
required reporting format. Whether a complaint constitutes a ``similar
complaint'' for purposes of conducting an investigation under FDA's QS
regulation is outside the scope of this alternative.
(Comment 15) One comment asked FDA to provide further information
on how a manufacturer is to provide supplemental information, including
whether FDA expects such information to be shared with the Agency. Some
comments also noted that FDA should explain how a previously submitted
summary malfunction report should be updated with new information,
including how to handle new information regarding a previously reported
event that would change the categorization of the event (e.g., if the
manufacturer subsequently became aware that a serious injury was
associated with a previously reported malfunction event).
(Response 15) FDA understands the need for clarification of how to
handle additional information and supplemental reporting under this
program and has revised the alternative to address this issue. A
manufacturer participating in the Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program must submit an initial summary report within the
Summary Malfunction Reporting Schedule timeframe described in table 1.
Supplemental reports to a summary malfunction report must also be
submitted within that timeframe. For example, if a manufacturer submits
a summary report for certain malfunction events of which it became
aware in January to March and in May of that same year becomes aware of
additional information that would have been required in the initial
summary report if it had been known to the manufacturer, then the
manufacturer must submit a supplemental report with that additional
information by July 31. Manufacturers do not need to submit a
supplemental report for new information if they would not have been
required to report that information had it been known or available at
the time of filing the initial summary malfunction report.
However, this timing for supplemental reports would not apply when
additional information is learned about an event or events included in
a previously submitted summary report that triggers individual
reporting requirements. For example, if the manufacturer becomes aware
of additional information reasonably suggesting that a previously
reported malfunction meets the criteria for a reportable serious injury
or death event, then the manufacturer must submit an initial,
individual MDR for the identified serious injury or death within 30
calendar days of becoming aware of the additional information. The
manufacturer must simultaneously submit a supplement to the initial MDR
summary report reducing the number of events summarized by 1, so that
the total number of events remains the same. The alternative has been
revised to reflect that these are requirements for participating in the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program.
(Comment 16) One comment stated that Form FDA 3500A is not an
optimal format because it is only used for single event reporting.
Other comments made specific recommendations and/or raised issues
regarding the proposed summary reporting format using Form FDA 3500A,
including the following: (a) In Form FDA 3500A, SECTIONS B.5 and H.10,
FDA should request that information be entered in a summary, high-level
form, rather than requiring detailed descriptions or itemized
investigation findings; (b) clarify the most ``up to date'' information
that is expected to be received in the report; (c) clarify that only
one brand name per product code should be entered in the field with
additional brand names being provided in a separate attachment (SECTION
D.1); (d) inclusion of patient age, weight, and breakdown of gender and
race is inappropriate for summary malfunction reporting, and it is not
clear if such information is required in a summary malfunction report;
(e) clarify that manufacturers can submit summary malfunction reports
for devices manufactured at multiple manufacturing sites (SECTION D.3);
(f) the summary format should permit a serial number to be used instead
of a lot number to identify the devices that are the subject of a
summary report (SECTION D.4); and (g) address how a manufacturer should
link a device problem code with a method code, result code, and
evaluation conclusion code (if different) for a single summary report
that includes more than one device problem.
(Response 16) FDA does not believe the summary reporting format
should be changed to use a new form. The
[[Page 40979]]
Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program aims to, among other
things, consolidate reporting of same or similar events into a single
summary report to reduce the overall volume of reports, while still
providing critical content to FDA. While the Form FDA 3500A was
developed for individual MDRs, manufacturers successfully used the Form
FDA 3500A to submit summary malfunction reports in FDA's pilot program.
In addition, as explained in our 2017 Proposal, for purposes of
streamlining changes that FDA and manufacturers must make to process or
submit summary reports under the Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program, we believe that using the Form FDA 3500A is the most
efficient approach. We provide the following responses to the specific
recommendations/issues raised regarding the summary reporting format:
(a) FDA continues to believe that it is important for summary
malfunction reports submitted under this program to provide a similar
level of detail in text narratives as is available in an individual
report to allow for sufficient understanding of the malfunction, any
circumstances that led to the malfunction, and any follow-up steps the
manufacturer has taken to investigate, correct, and prevent the
malfunction from happening again. These narrative text fields are key
to helping ensure that summary reporting under this program streamlines
malfunction reporting without reducing the reporting of important
details regarding device performance and transparency to the public.
(b) Each summary report must be ``up to date,'' meaning that it must
include all required information available, as of the close of the
quarterly time period listed in the Summary Malfunction Reporting
Schedule (see table 1). FDA has clarified this in section IV.F. (c) FDA
disagrees that separate attachments with additional brand names should
be permitted to accompany a summary malfunction report. Each summary
malfunction report may only summarize malfunction events for a single
brand name. We further clarified this in the instructions for the
summary reporting format at section IV.D. Including multiple brand
names in an attachment to a single summary report would, among other
things, result in FDA having difficulty identifying the specific
malfunction event to the exact device brand. (d) FDA agrees that
information summarizing patient age, weight, gender, race, and
ethnicity may not be relevant for many summary malfunction reports. FDA
is revising the description of the summary reporting format to clarify
that inclusion of this information in Section B.5 is not a required
entry for the form. However, FDA recommends including descriptors such
as patient weight or race in a text narrative for a malfunction summary
report if the information is available and indicates that a malfunction
is more likely to affect a specific group of patients. (e) FDA is
revising the description of the summary reporting format to clarify
that multiple manufacturing sites could be entered in SECTION G.1 if
the device is manufactured at multiple sites. We note that depending on
their roles, each manufacturing site may be responsible for submitting
MDRs. (See e.g., section 2.17 of FDA's MDR Guidance (Ref. 3), which
provides additional information regarding reporting obligations for
contract manufacturers.) (f) FDA agrees that a serial number may be
included in SECTION D.4 and has added ``serial number'' to the
reporting format instructions for that section. (g) The summary
reporting format requires firms to identify the method, result, and
conclusion codes in Block H6 of the Form FDA 3500A, including as many
codes as are necessary to describe the event problem and evaluation for
the reportable malfunction events that are being summarized. If the
report summarizes reportable events that involved more than one type of
device problem (see e.g., Case Scenario #2, Report #3 in Appendix A
(Ref. 6)), differences in the conclusion code according to the
different device problems can be explained in SECTION H.10.
E. Consideration of Combination Products
(Comment 17) Some comments raised issues regarding the application
of the malfunction summary reporting for combination products that
contain a device constituent part but that are marketed under drug or
biological product marketing authorization pathways (referred to in
this document as drug and biologic-led combination products), as
opposed to those under device marketing authorization pathways (device-
led combination products). Issues raised in these comments include:
Concerns about a device product code-based eligibility approach for
drug and biologic-led combination products because such products may
not have a device product code; the quarterly schedule proposed because
it would create redundancies for drug and biologic-led combination
products, which are subject to periodic reporting; the format proposed
because it might not be compatible with the reporting systems for drugs
or biological products that are utilized for drug and biologic-led
combination products; and development of a single report that includes
malfunction summary reporting and satisfies other combination product
reporting requirements.
(Response 17) Among other things, the final rule on postmarketing
safety reporting (PMSR) for combination products (81 FR 92603, December
20, 2016), codified in part 4, subpart B (21 CFR part 4, subpart B),
clarified that all combination product applicants must comply with
malfunction reporting requirements as described in part 803 if their
combination product contains a device constituent part. Accordingly, in
the 2017 Proposal, FDA requested comment on how the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting Program might be implemented for
combination products, including drug and biologic-led combination
products. Shortly after the issuance of the proposal for this program,
FDA also published a draft guidance entitled, ``Postmarketing Safety
Reporting for Combination Products; Guidance for Industry and FDA
Staff'' (PMSR draft guidance) (Ref. 7) regarding compliance with the
final rule on PMSR for combination products, and an Immediately in
Effect guidance announcing FDA's compliance policy for that rule (Ref.
8). The PMSR draft guidance noted that the Agency was proposing the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program and stated that the
Agency intends to update the PMSR draft guidance if combination
products are included in the program. The compliance policy guidance
announced the Agency's intent to delay enforcement of certain
provisions of the rule, including malfunction reporting requirements
for drug and biologic-led combination products, to provide applicants
with additional time to consider Agency recommendations and technical
specifications as they update their systems and procedures to comply
with those provisions.
Applicants of device-led combination products must submit MDRs in
accordance with part 803 (see Sec. 4.104 (21 CFR 4.104)), and
therefore, they report malfunctions using the same system as device
manufacturers. Thus, FDA believes the eMDR data system and instructions
support use of the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program for
such products. Accordingly, we are including device-led combination
products in the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program.
However, combination product applicants for drug
[[Page 40980]]
and biologic-led combination products with a device constituent part
must submit malfunction reports under a different system. Under Sec.
4.104(b), malfunction reports must be submitted in accordance with 21
CFR 314.80(g) or 600.80(h)) for these combination products. Additional
considerations, including the issues raised in comments as discussed
above, need to be addressed before drug and biologic-led combination
products could be included in the Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program. As noted above, the Agency intends to delay
enforcement of the malfunction reporting requirements for drug and
biologic-led combination products under the PMSR final rule. FDA will
consider all relevant comments submitted on the 2017 Proposal as well
as those submitted on the PMSR draft guidance in developing an approach
for voluntary malfunction summary reporting for such combination
products.
F. Submission Schedule and Logistics
(Comment 18) One comment recommended that FDA permit manufacturers
to submit individual reports for each adverse event within 90 calendar
days from the date they become aware of the reportable event, while
using the summary format. The comment also suggested that FDA provide
an additional 30 days for the submission of summary reports because the
manufacturer may need more than a month between the end of the
reporting period and the due date to aggregate reports.
(Response 18) FDA disagrees with this comment. Permitting
manufacturers to submit individual reports using the summary format
within 90 calendar days would delay the submission of malfunction
information to FDA without providing the anticipated benefits of
summary reporting that FDA identified in the 2017 Proposal, such as
increased efficiency in processing malfunction reports and more readily
apparent malfunction trends. While we recognize that a manufacturer may
become aware of some reportable malfunction events toward the end of a
quarter, manufacturers will have at least 30 days from that time to
prepare and submit summary malfunction reports. FDA does not believe
that manufacturers will need an additional 30 days beyond the reporting
schedule outlined in the 2017 Proposal to aggregate malfunction reports
into a summary report. Therefore, we have retained the Summary
Malfunction Reporting Schedule that was included in the 2017 Proposal
(see table 1).
(Comment 19) One comment suggested that FDA use a more generic
reporting number format or a completely different reporting number
format.
(Response 19) FDA disagrees with this comment. The required
reporting number format for this program uses the existing common
format that manufacturers must use to submit individual reports through
their electronic reporting systems under part 803. Therefore, we
believe there is no need for a separate MDR reporting number format to
identify summary reports.
(Comment 20) One comment suggested that FDA clarify what the
manufacturer should do if an investigation is not completed within the
reported timeframe.
(Response 20) As discussed in response to Comment 15, FDA has
revised the alternative to include instructions regarding supplemental
reporting for summary reports submitted under this voluntary program.
In situations where a manufacturer is not able to complete its
investigation regarding a reportable malfunction by the deadline for
submitting a summary report, the manufacturer is still required to
report the event within the timeframes specified in the Summary
Malfunction Reporting Schedule (see table 1). If additional information
becomes known or available to the manufacturer after submission of a
summary report, including additional information that becomes known
through an investigation, the manufacturer is required to submit
supplemental reports amending its initial submission as needed.
G. Addition of Product Codes to the Program
(Comment 21) Some comments suggested that FDA should explain more
clearly how industry would make a request under Sec. 803.19(b) and
provide a mechanism for industry to request an exemption, when
appropriate, for product codes that may be newly assigned within the
first 2 years.
(Response 21) FDA is not making any changes to the alternative in
response to this comment. As discussed in section VI, FDA intends to
periodically assess the eligibility of product codes after they have
been in existence for 2 years and will update the FDA's Product
Classification database accordingly. Manufacturers can also send a
request for a product code to be added to the list of eligible product
codes and for manufacturers of devices within that product code to be
granted the same alternative for malfunction events associated with
those devices. Information about where to send such requests is
provided in section VI.
H. Other Comments
(Comment 22) One comment stated that the average Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) burden on manufacturers of 6 minutes per response
appears to be a very low estimate.
(Response 22) FDA disagrees with this comment. The estimation of
time is the amount of time needed to submit a summary malfunction
report. It is essentially the same amount of time needed to submit an
individual report because the event narrative should be similar, with
the exception of one additional line that is entered that indicates the
number of adverse events represented by the report. It does not include
the time needed to evaluate and investigate complaints that may
represent reportable malfunction events.
(Comment 23) Two comments suggested that FDA should provide clarity
on how the program will apply with national competent authorities via
the National Competent Authority Report (NCAR) exchange program.
(Response 23) FDA disagrees with this comment. The NCAR exchange
program is separate from FDA's MDR reporting requirements. Malfunction
summary reporting under this program does not change the information
shared through the NCAR exchange program, and the NCAR program is
currently outside the scope of the Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program.
(Comment 24) One comment suggests that FDA should use IBM's Watson
Platform for Health GxP (Watson) to conduct an analysis to identify the
product codes that represent the largest opportunity described in the
business case for patients, industry, and FDA instead of other database
systems.
(Response 24) FDA disagrees with this comment. Among other reasons,
the IBM Watson Platform is not an FDA-owned resource; therefore, it is
not logistically feasible for FDA to use this platform to identify
product codes eligible for the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program at this time.
III. Principles for Malfunction Summary Reporting
Informed by the findings from the Pilot Program for Medical Device
Reporting on Malfunctions, FDA identified the following overarching
principles for summary reporting of malfunctions:
The collection of information in summary format should
allow FDA to
[[Page 40981]]
collect sufficient detail to understand reportable malfunction events.
To increase efficiency, summary malfunction reporting
should occur in a common format for the electronic reporting system
used.
Information about reportable malfunctions should be
transparent to FDA and to the public, regardless of whether the
information is reported as an individual MDR or a summary report.
Information contained in a summary malfunction report that is protected
from public disclosure under applicable disclosure laws would be
redacted prior to release of the report.
Manufacturers should communicate information regarding an
imminent hazard at the earliest time possible.
Summary reporting is meant to streamline the process of
reporting malfunctions. It does not change regulatory requirements for
MDR-related investigations or recordkeeping by manufacturers. (For
example, manufacturers participating in the Voluntary Malfunction
Summary Reporting Program remain subject to requirements for
establishing and maintaining MDR event files under Sec. 803.18. In
addition, under the QS regulation, manufacturers must evaluate, review,
and investigate any complaint that represents an MDR reportable event
(see Sec. 820.198).
Summary reporting information should not be duplicative of
information received through other MDR reporting processes.
IV. Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program
For the reasons discussed in the 2017 Proposal and in section II,
the Agency has determined that, at this time, pursuant to section
519(a)(1)(B)(i)(III) of the FD&C Act, all devices should remain subject
to the reporting requirements of part 803, to protect the public
health. However, based on the findings from the 2015 Pilot Program, the
Agency's experience with summary reporting programs, its experience
with MDR reporting generally, and the comments received on 2017
Proposal, FDA has determined that for many devices, it is appropriate
to permit manufacturers to submit malfunction summary reports on a
quarterly basis, for certain malfunctions, instead of individual, 30-
day malfunction reports.
Therefore, under Sec. 803.19, FDA is granting the manufacturers of
devices within eligible product codes, as identified in FDA's Product
Classification Database (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfPCD/classification.cfm) on August 17, 2018, an alternative to
the reporting requirements at Sec. Sec. 803.10(c)(1),
803.20(b)(3)(ii), 803.50(a)(2), 803.52, and 803.56 with respect to
reportable malfunction events associated with those devices. The list
reflects FDA's consideration of a list proposed by industry
representatives, consistent with the MDUFA IV Commitment Letter, as
well as the comments received on the 2017 Proposal regarding eligible
product codes. To assist manufacturers and the public in identifying
which product codes are eligible for participation in this voluntary
program, FDA's searchable Product Classification Database (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfPCD/classification.cfm)
has been updated to reflect such eligibility. As discussed in section
II, FDA is also making some changes to the conditions of the
alternative after considering the comments received on the 2017
Proposal.
The alternative permits manufacturers of devices within eligible
product codes to submit malfunction reports in summary format on a
quarterly basis for those devices, subject to the conditions of the
alternative described in the remainder of this section. Such
manufacturers ``self-elect'' to participate by submitting summary
malfunction reports in accordance with the conditions of the
alternative. They do not need to submit a separate application to FDA
to participate.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We note that the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting
Program does not apply to importers or device user facilities.
Therefore, requirements under part 803 for importers and device user
facilities are unaffected by this alternative. For example,
importers will continue to submit individual MDRs to the
manufacturer under Sec. 803.40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The remainder of this section describes the following conditions
that manufacturers must follow if they choose to submit summary
malfunction reports for devices within eligible product codes under the
alternative: (1) The conditions under which individual malfunction
reports are required; (2) submission of supplemental reports; (3) the
format for summary malfunction reports; (4) considerations for
combination products; and (5) the schedule and other logistics for
submission of summary reports. Because this is an alternative, if a
manufacturer does not submit summary reports for reportable malfunction
events in accordance with the conditions described in this section,
including the reporting schedule and format, then the manufacturer must
submit individual malfunction reports in compliance with all
requirements under part 803 (unless the manufacturer has been granted a
different exemption, variance, or alternative that applies).
A. Events Outside the Scope of This Alternative
The Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program does not apply
to reportable death or serious injury events, which are still required
to be reported to FDA within the mandatory 30-calendar-day timeframe,
under Sec. Sec. [thinsp]803.50 and 803.52, or within the 5-work day
timeframe under Sec. [thinsp]803.53. Thus, if a manufacturer
participating in the program becomes aware of information reasonably
suggesting that a device that it markets may have caused or contributed
to a death or serious injury, then the manufacturer must submit an
individual MDR for that event because it involves a reportable death or
serious injury.
The reporting requirements at Sec. 803.53 also continue to apply
to manufacturers participating in the program. Under Sec. 803.53(a), a
5-day report must be filed if a manufacturer becomes aware of an MDR
reportable event that necessitates remedial action to prevent an
unreasonable risk of substantial harm to the public health. Further,
under Sec. 803.53(b), if FDA has made a written request for the
submission of a 5-day report, the manufacturer must submit, without
further requests, a 5-day report for all subsequent reportable
malfunctions of the same nature that involve substantially similar
devices for the time period specified in the written request. FDA may
extend the time period stated in the original written request if the
Agency determines it is in the interest of the public health (see Sec.
803.53(b)).
B. Individual Reporting Conditions
Manufacturers of devices in eligible product codes may continue
submitting individual, 30-day malfunction reports in compliance with
Sec. Sec. 803.50 and 803.52 if they choose to do so. However, those
manufacturers may submit all reportable malfunction events for devices
in eligible product codes in the summary format and according to the
schedule described below in section IV.D and F, unless one of the
following individual reporting conditions applies:
1. A Reportable Malfunction Is Associated With a 5-Day Report
After submitting a 5-day report required under Sec. 803.53(a), all
subsequent reportable malfunctions of the same nature that involve
substantially similar devices must be submitted as individual MDRs in
[[Page 40982]]
compliance with Sec. Sec. 803.50 and 803.52 until the date that the
remedial action has been terminated to FDA's satisfaction. Summary
reporting of malfunctions may then resume on the regularly scheduled
summary reporting cycle. Submission of reportable malfunctions
associated with 5-day reports in this manner will assist FDA in
monitoring the time course and resolution of the issue presenting an
unreasonable risk of substantial harm to the public health.
2. A Reportable Malfunction Is the Subject of Certain Device Recalls
When a device is the subject of a recall involving the correction
or removal of the device to address a malfunction and that correction
or removal is required to be reported to FDA under part 806,\2\ all
reportable malfunction events of the same nature that involve the same
device or a similar device marketed by the manufacturer must be
submitted as individual MDRs in accordance with Sec. Sec. 803.50 and
803.52 until the date that the recall is terminated. After the recall
is terminated, summary reporting may resume on the regularly scheduled
summary reporting cycle. The requirement to submit individual reports
under this condition is triggered on the date that the manufacturer
submits a report of a correction or removal required under part 806 (or
the date that the manufacturer submits a report of the correction or
removal under part 803 or part 1004 instead, as permitted under Sec.
806.10(f)). This will allow FDA to monitor the frequency of reportable
malfunctions associated with the recall and effectiveness of the recall
strategy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ FDA regulations provide that ``[e]ach device manufacturer or
importer shall submit a written report to FDA of any correction or
removal of a device initiated by such manufacturer or importer if
the correction or removal was initiated: (1) To reduce a risk to
health posed by the device or (2) to remedy a violation of the act
caused by the device which may present a risk to health unless the
information has already been provided as set forth in paragraph (f)
of this section or the corrective or removal action is exempt from
the reporting requirements under Sec. 806.1(b).'' We note that
under part 806, manufacturers and importers are not required to
report a correction or removal that meets the definition of a class
III recall under 21 CFR part 7. (See 21 CFR 7.3(g) and (m), 806.2(d)
and (j) through (k), and 806.10; see also 62 FR 27183 at 27184.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If a manufacturer becomes aware of reportable malfunction events
before the date that the requirement to submit individual reports is
triggered and a summary report for those events has not yet been
submitted to FDA, then the manufacturer must submit any of those
malfunction events related to the recall in a summary MDR format within
30 calendar days of submitting the required report of correction or
removal. In the summary MDR, the manufacturer must include a check box
of recall in section H.7 of the electronic Form FDA 3500A.
3. FDA Has Determined That Individual MDR Reporting Is Necessary To
Address a Public Health Issue
If FDA has determined that individual malfunction reports are
necessary to provide additional information and more rapid reporting
for an identified public health issue involving certain devices,
manufacturers must submit reportable malfunction events for those
devices as individual MDRs in compliance with Sec. Sec. 803.50 and
803.52. Under these circumstances, FDA will provide written
notification to manufacturers of relevant devices that individual MDR
submissions are necessary. FDA will provide further written notice when
manufacturers of those devices may resume participation in summary
malfunction reporting.
The requirement to submit individual reports under this condition
is triggered on the date the manufacturer receives the written
notification from FDA. If a manufacturer became aware of reportable
malfunction events before the date that the requirement to submit
individual reports is triggered and a summary report for those events
has not yet been submitted to FDA, then the manufacturer must submit
any of those malfunction events for the identified devices to FDA
within 30 calendar days of receiving notification from FDA.
4. FDA Has Determined That a Device Manufacturer May Not Report in
Summary Reporting Format
FDA may determine that a specific manufacturer is no longer allowed
to participate in the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program
for reasons including, but not limited to, failure to comply with
applicable MDR requirements under part 803, failure to follow the
conditions of the program, or the need to monitor a public health
issue. In that case, FDA will provide written notification to the
device manufacturer to submit individual malfunction reports in
compliance with Sec. Sec. 803.50 and 803.52. The requirement to submit
individual reports under this condition is triggered on the date the
manufacturer receives the written notification from FDA. If a
manufacturer became aware of reportable malfunction events before the
date that the requirement to submit individual reports is triggered
under this condition and a summary report for those events has not yet
been submitted to FDA, then the manufacturer must submit those
malfunction events within 30 calendar days of receiving notification
from FDA.
5. A New Type of Reportable Malfunction Occurs for a Device
If a manufacturer becomes aware of information reasonably
suggesting a reportable malfunction event has occurred for a device
that the manufacturer markets and the reportable malfunction is a new
type of malfunction that the manufacturer has not previously reported
to FDA for that device, then the manufacturer must submit an individual
report for that reportable malfunction in compliance with Sec. Sec.
803.50 and 803.52. After the manufacturer submits this initial
individual report, subsequent malfunctions of this type may be
submitted in summary form according to the reporting schedule in table
1, unless another individual reporting condition applies.
C. Supplemental Reports
In general, if a manufacturer obtains information required in a
malfunction summary report (see section IV.D. describing the required
content of a summary report), that the manufacturer did not provide
because it was not known or was not available when the manufacturer
submitted the initial summary malfunction report, the manufacturer must
submit the supplemental information to FDA in an electronic format in
accordance with Sec. 803.12(a). The supplemental information must be
submitted to FDA by the submission deadline described in the Summary
Malfunction Reporting Schedule (table 1), according to the date on
which the manufacturer becomes aware of the supplemental information.
Manufacturers must continue to follow the requirements for the content
of supplemental reports set forth at Sec. 803.56(a) thorough (c),
meaning that on a supplemental or follow up report, the manufacturer
must: (a) Indicate that the report being submitted is a supplemental or
follow up report; (b) submit the appropriate identification numbers of
the report that you are updating with the supplemental information
(e.g., your original manufacturer report number and the user facility
or importer report number of any report on which your report was
based), if applicable; and (c) include only the new, changed, or
corrected information.
However, if a manufacturer submits a summary malfunction report and
subsequently becomes aware of information reasonably suggesting that
[[Page 40983]]
an event (or events) summarized therein represents a reportable serious
injury or death event, or a new type of reportable malfunction, then
the manufacturer must submit reports as follows: The manufacturer must
submit an initial, individual MDR for the identified serious injury,
death, or new type of reportable malfunction event within 30 calendar
days of becoming aware of the additional information. The manufacturer
must simultaneously submit a supplement to the initial malfunction
summary report reducing the number of events summarized accordingly, so
that the total number of events remains the same.
D. Malfunction Reporting Summary Format
Manufacturers of devices in eligible product codes who elect to
participate in the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program must
submit summary malfunction reports in the format described below. As
detailed in the 2017 Proposal and Appendix, the format largely adopts
the format that was tested in FDA's Pilot Program for Medical Device
Reporting on Malfunctions and is compatible with the Form FDA 3500A
(Ref. 9), which allows manufacturers to submit MDRs using the same
electronic submission form that they use to submit individual MDRs, in
accordance with the eMDR Final Rule (79 FR 8832, February 14, 2014).
Because summary malfunction reports represent a grouping of malfunction
events for a specific model of a device, the summary reporting format
would require an additional element in the summary text narrative to
identify the number of reportable malfunctions that each report
represents. As described below, the XML tags ``'' and ``''
are placed on both sides of the number of events (NOE) to make the
number extractable from the report. FDA believes that submission of
summary reports in the format described below will provide the most
compact and efficient reporting mechanism for streamlining malfunction
reporting that still provides sufficient detail for FDA to monitor
devices effectively.
Format Instructions: Separate summary malfunction reports must be
submitted for each unique combination of brand name, device model, and
problem code(s). (See Appendix A for case examples of how to report
(Ref. 6).) Each summary malfunction report must include at least the
following information collected on Form FDA 3500A and must be submitted
in an electronic format:
SECTION B.5: Describe Event or Problem--To distinguish
this report as a summary malfunction report, the first sentence of the
device event narrative must read: ``This report summarizes XXX
NOE> malfunction events,'' where XXX is replaced by the number of
malfunction events being summarized.
The device event narrative must then include a detailed description
of the nature of the events and, if relevant and available, we
recommend including a range of patient age and weight and a breakdown
of patient gender, race, and ethnicity.
SECTION D.1: Brand Name.
SECTION D.2 and D.2.b: Common Device Name and Product
Code. Include the common name of the device and Product Classification
Code (Procode).
SECTION D.3: Manufacturer Name, City, and State.
SECTION D.4: Device Identification--Enter the model and/or
catalog number and lot number(s) and/or serial number(s) for the
devices that are the subject of the MDR. Include any device identifier
(DI) portion of the unique device identifier (UDI) for the device
version or model that is the subject of the MDR.
SECTION G.1: Contact Office (and Manufacturing Site(s) for
Devices)--Enter the name, address, and email of the manufacturer
reporting site (contact office), including the contact name for the
summary report being submitted. Enter the name and address of the
manufacturing site(s) for the device, if different from the contact
office.
SECTION G.2: Phone Number of Contact Office.
SECTION G.5: Combination Products--If applicable, indicate
that the report involves a combination product (see section IV.E.).
SECTION H.1: Type of Reportable Event--Check
``Malfunction'' in this box.
SECTION H.6: Event Problem and Evaluation Codes--
[cir] Enter the device problem code(s). (See Appendix A for case
examples of how to report (Ref. 6).)
[cir] Enter the evaluation code(s) for the following categories:
Method, Results, Conclusion.
[cir] Enter a Conclusion Code, even if the device was not
evaluated.
SECTION H.10: Additional Manufacturer Narrative--Provide a
summary of the results of the investigation for the reported
malfunctions, including any follow up actions taken, and any additional
information that would be helpful in understanding how the manufacturer
addressed the malfunction events summarized in the report. Enter a
breakdown of the malfunction events summarized in the report, including
the number of devices that were returned, the number of devices that
were labeled ``for single use'' (if any), and the number of devices
that were reprocessed and reused (if any).
E. Combination Product Considerations
As noted in the response to comment 17 above, device-led
combination products are included in this alternative that we are
granting under Sec. 803.19 to permit voluntary malfunction summary
reporting. The eMDR data system and instructions support use of the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program for device-led
combination products. However, as discussed in response to comment 17
above, additional considerations need to be addressed before drug and
biologic-led combination products could be included in the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting Program. As noted in Response 17, the
Agency intends to delay enforcement of the malfunction reporting
requirements for drug and biologic-led combination products under the
PMSR final rule. FDA will consider the relevant comments received on
the 2017 Proposal, as well as any additional, relevant comments
relating to malfunction reporting for drug and biologic-led combination
products submitted in relation to the PMSR draft guidance in developing
an approach for voluntary malfunction summary reporting for such
combination products.
F. Submission Schedule and Logistics
Manufacturers submitting malfunction summary reports or
supplemental reports to a malfunction summary report must use
electronic reporting (Ref. 10) to submit those reports on a quarterly
basis according to the schedule in table 1. The summary malfunction
report must include the MDR Number, which consists of the registration
number of the manufacturer, the year in which the event is being
reported, and a 5-digit sequence number. Information included in a
malfunction summary report must be current as of the last date of the
quarterly timeframe identified in the first column of table 1.
[[Page 40984]]
Table 1--Summary Malfunction Reporting Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reportable malfunctions or
supplemental information that you
become aware of during these Must be submitted to FDA by:
timeframes:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 1-March 31............... April 30.
April 1-June 30.................. July 31.
July 1-September 30.............. October 31.
October 1-December 31............ January 31.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program applies only to
reportable malfunction events that manufacturers become aware of on or
after August 17, 2018. The deadline for FDA accepting the first round
of quarterly reports for this program is October 31, 2018.
Under Sec. Sec. 803.17 and 803.18, manufacturers are required to
develop, maintain, and implement written MDR procedures and establish
and maintain MDR event files, and those requirements remain applicable
for manufacturers that elect to participate in this program. Among
other things, a manufacturer must develop, maintain, and implement MDR
procedures that provide for timely transmission of complete MDRs to
FDA. (See Sec. 803.17(a)(3)). Manufacturers participating in the
Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program will need to update
their internal MDR processes and procedures to provide for submitting
summary malfunction reports within the Summary Malfunction Reporting
Schedule.
V. Implementation Strategy
The goal of the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program is
to permit manufacturers of devices under certain product codes to
report malfunctions on a quarterly basis and in a summary format, as
outlined in the MDUFA IV Commitment Letter (Ref. 1), in a manner that
provides for effective monitoring of devices and is beneficial for FDA,
industry, and the public. An important part of this voluntary program
is providing clarification to manufacturers regarding the product codes
eligible for the program.
Consistent with the MDUFA IV Commitment Letter (Ref. 1), FDA has
identified eligible product codes for the Voluntary Malfunction Summary
Reporting Program in FDA's Product Classification Database, available
on FDA's website, as part of granting the alternative (see https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfPCD/classification.cfm).
Manufacturers that choose to participate in quarterly, summary
reporting through this program will remain responsible for complying
with applicable MDR requirements under part 803 (e.g., requirements to
establish and maintain MDR event files under Sec. 803.18) and QS
requirements under part 820 (21 CFR part 820) (e.g., the requirement to
evaluate, review, and investigate any complaint that represents an MDR
reportable event under Sec. 820.198).
If FDA determines that individual malfunction reports are necessary
from a specific manufacturer or for specific devices, FDA will notify
relevant manufacturers that they must submit individual reports and
provide an explanation for that decision and, as appropriate, the steps
necessary to return to summary, quarterly reporting. The Agency also
notes that, under Sec. 803.19(d), it may revoke or modify in writing
an exemption, variance, or alternative reporting requirement if it
determines that revocation or modification is necessary to protect the
public health.
VI. Updating Product Codes for Inclusion Into the Program
FDA recognizes that new product codes will be created after the
date of granting the Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program
alternative under Sec. 803.19. In general, FDA does not intend to
consider devices under product codes in existence for less than 2 years
to be eligible for the program, unless the new product code was issued
solely for administrative reasons. Any product code in existence after
the publication date will be initially ineligible to participate in the
program. However, FDA will periodically evaluate new product codes
after they have been in existence for 2 years to determine whether they
should be added to the list of product codes eligible for the Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting Program. If FDA determines that a new
product code should be added, then it will grant manufacturers of
devices within that product code the same alternative under Sec.
803.19 for malfunction events associated with those devices and update
FDA's Product Classification database accordingly to reflect the
changes.
Manufacturers can send a request for a product code to be added to
the list of eligible product codes and for manufacturers of devices
within that product code to be granted the same alternative for
malfunction events associated with those devices to the
[email protected] mailbox. You may also mail your written request
to MDR Policy Branch, Division of Postmarket Surveillance, Office of
Surveillance and Biometrics, Center for Devices and Radiological
Health, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3217, Silver Spring, MD
20993-0002.
VII. Conclusion
In accordance with section 519(a)(1)(B)(i) of the FD&C Act and
Sec. 803.19, FDA is granting the alternative described in section IV
to manufacturers of devices in eligible product codes, as identified in
the FDA Product Classification Database (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfPCD/classification.cfm) on
August 17, 2018. FDA believes that for the devices in eligible product
codes, quarterly, summary reporting in accordance with the conditions
of the alternative will be as effective as the current MDR regulatory
requirements for purposes of identifying and monitoring potential
device safety concerns and device malfunctions. The Voluntary
Malfunction Summary Reporting Program will allow manufacturers to
submit summary reports with event narratives that will help FDA more
efficiently process malfunction reports and identify malfunction
trends. In addition, FDA's determination of product code eligibility
and the conditions of participation in the program will require
submission of individual 30-day or 5-day malfunction reports in
circumstances where such reports are necessary to protect public
health.
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.30(h) 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.
[[Page 40985]]
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The Voluntary Malfunction Summary Reporting Program described in
this Notice contains information collection provisions that 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). These provisions
have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0437.
This document also refers to previously approved collections of
information. These collections of information are subject to review by
the OMB under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of
information in part 4, subpart B, regarding postmarketing safety
reporting for combination products have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0834; the collections of information in part 803, regarding
medical device reporting, have been approved under OMB control number
0910-0437; the collections of information in 806, regarding corrections
and removals, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0359;
the collections of information in 21 CFR part 807, subpart E, regarding
premarket notification, have been approved under OMB control number
0910-0120; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 814, subparts
A through E, regarding premarket approval, have been approved under OMB
control number 0910-0231; the collections of information in 21 CFR part
810, regarding medical device recall authority, have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0432; the collections of information in
part 820, regarding quality system regulations, have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0073; the collections of information in
21 CFR parts 1002 through 1050, regarding radiological health, have
been approved under OMB control number 0910-0025; the collections of
information regarding the MedWatch: The Food and Drug Administration
Medical Products Reporting Program have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0291; and the collections of information regarding the
Adverse Event Program for Medical Devices (Medical Product Safety
Network (MedSun)) have been approved under OMB control number 0910-
0471.
X. References
The following references are on display in the Dockets Management
Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852 and are
available for viewing by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday; they are also available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov. FDA has verified the website addresses, as
of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register, but
websites are subject to change over time.
1. Medical Device User Fee Agreement IV Commitment Letter, available
at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForIndustry/UserFees/MedicalDeviceUserFee/UCM535548.pdf.
2. Food and Drug Administration, ``Medical Device Reporting--
Alternative Summary Reporting (ASR) Program; Guidance for
Industry,'' (October 19, 2000); available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm072102.pdf.
3. Food and Drug Administration, ``Medical Device Reporting for
Manufacturers; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug
Administration Staff,'' (November 8, 2016); available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/ucm359566.pdf.
4. Food and Drug Administration, ``Center for Devices and
Radiological Health Appeals Processes; Guidance for Industry and
Food and Drug Administration Staff,'' (May 17, 2013); available at
https://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/UCM284670.pdf.
5. Food and Drug Administration, ``International Medical Device
Regulators Forum,'' available at https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/InternationalPrograms/IMDRF/default.htm.
6. Appendix A, ``Case Examples of Summary Malfunction Reporting,''
available in Docket No. FDA-2017-N-6730.
7. Food and Drug Administration, ``Postmarketing Safety Reporting
for Combination Products; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and
Drug Administration Staff,'' (March 2018); available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM601454.pdf.
8. Food and Drug Administration, ``Compliance Policy for Combination
Product Postmarketing Safety Reporting, Immediately in Effect
Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff,''
available at https://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm601456.htm.
9. Food and Drug Administration, Form FDA 3500A, available at
https://www.fda.gov/downloads/aboutfda/reportsmanualsforms/forms/ucm048334.pdf. 5.
10. Electronic Medical Device Reporting (eMDR) (manufacturers may
obtain information on how to prepare and submit reports in an
electronic format that FDA can process, review, and archive),
available at: https://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/FDAeSubmitter/ucm107903.htm.
Dated: August 13, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-17770 Filed 8-16-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P