Medical Devices; Neurological Devices; Classification of the Traumatic Brain Injury Eye Movement Assessment Aid, 71383-71385 [2021-27227]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 239 / Thursday, December 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 882
[Docket No. FDA–2021–N–0896]
Medical Devices; Neurological
Devices; Classification of the
Traumatic Brain Injury Eye Movement
Assessment Aid
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final amendment; final order.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
classifying the traumatic brain injury
eye movement assessment aid into class
II (special controls). The special controls
that apply to the device type are
identified in this order and will be part
of the codified language for the
traumatic brain injury eye movement
assessment aid’s classification. We are
taking this action because we have
determined that classifying the device
into class II (special controls) will
provide a reasonable assurance of safety
and effectiveness of the device. We
believe this action will also enhance
patients’ access to beneficial innovative
devices.
DATES: This order is effective December
16, 2021. The classification was
applicable on December 28, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick Antkowiak, Center for Devices
and Radiological Health, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 4254, Silver Spring,
MD 20993–0002, 240–402–3705,
Patrick.Antkowiak@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
I. Background
Upon request, FDA has classified the
traumatic brain injury eye movement
assessment aid as class II (special
controls), which we have determined
will provide a reasonable assurance of
safety and effectiveness. In addition, we
believe this action will enhance
patients’ access to beneficial innovation,
by placing the device into a lower
device class than the automatic class III
assignment.
The automatic assignment of class III
occurs by operation of law and without
any action by FDA, regardless of the
level of risk posed by the new device.
Any device that was not in commercial
distribution before May 28, 1976, is
automatically classified as, and remains
within, class III and requires premarket
approval unless and until FDA takes an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Dec 15, 2021
Jkt 256001
action to classify or reclassify the device
(see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)). We refer to
these devices as ‘‘postamendments
devices’’ because they were not in
commercial distribution prior to the
date of enactment of the Medical Device
Amendments of 1976, which amended
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FD&C Act).
FDA may take a variety of actions in
appropriate circumstances to classify or
reclassify a device into class I or II. We
may issue an order finding a new device
to be substantially equivalent under
section 513(i) of the FD&C Act (see 21
U.S.C. 360c(i)) to a predicate device that
does not require premarket approval.
We determine whether a new device is
substantially equivalent to a predicate
device by means of the procedures for
premarket notification under section
510(k) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(k)
and part 807 (21 CFR part 807).
FDA may also classify a device
through ‘‘De Novo’’ classification, a
common name for the process
authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the
FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and
Drug Administration Modernization Act
of 1997 established the first procedure
for De Novo classification (Pub. L. 105–
115). Section 607 of the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation
Act modified the De Novo application
process by adding a second procedure
(Pub. L. 112–144). A device sponsor
may utilize either procedure for De
Novo classification.
Under the first procedure, the person
submits a 510(k) for a device that has
not previously been classified. After
receiving an order from FDA classifying
the device into class III under section
513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, the person
then requests a classification under
section 513(f)(2).
Under the second procedure, rather
than first submitting a 510(k) and then
a request for classification, if the person
determines that there is no legally
marketed device upon which to base a
determination of substantial
equivalence, that person requests a
classification under section 513(f)(2) of
the FD&C Act.
Under either procedure for De Novo
classification, FDA is required to
classify the device by written order
within 120 days. The classification will
be according to the criteria under
section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
Although the device was automatically
placed within class III, the De Novo
classification is considered to be the
initial classification of the device.
When FDA classifies a device into
class I or II via the De Novo process, the
device can serve as a predicate for
future devices of that type, including for
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71383
510(k)s (see section 513(f)(2)(B)(i) of the
FD&C Act). As a result, other device
sponsors do not have to submit a De
Novo request or premarket approval
application to market a substantially
equivalent device (see section 513(i) of
the FD&C Act, defining ‘‘substantial
equivalence’’). Instead, sponsors can use
the less-burdensome 510(k) process,
when necessary, to market their device.
II. De Novo Classification
On December 22, 2017, FDA received
Oculogica, Inc.’s request for De Novo
classification of the EyeBOX®. FDA
reviewed the request in order to classify
the device under the criteria for
classification set forth in section
513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
We classify devices into class II if
general controls by themselves are
insufficient to provide reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness,
but there is sufficient information to
establish special controls that, in
combination with the general controls,
provide reasonable assurance of the
safety and effectiveness of the device for
its intended use (see section 513(a)(1)(B)
of the FD&C Act). After review of the
information submitted in the request,
we determined that the device can be
classified into class II with the
establishment of special controls. FDA
has determined that these special
controls, in addition to the general
controls, will provide reasonable
assurance of the safety and effectiveness
of the device.
Therefore, on December 28, 2018,
FDA issued an order to the requester
classifying the device into class II. In
this final order, FDA is codifying the
classification of the device by adding 21
CFR 882.1455.1 We have named the
generic type of device traumatic brain
injury eye movement assessment aid,
and it is identified as a prescription
device that uses a patient’s tracked eye
movements to provide an interpretation
of the functional condition of the
patient’s brain. This device is an
assessment aid that is not intended for
standalone detection or diagnostic
purposes.
FDA has identified the following risks
to health associated specifically with
this type of device and the measures
1 FDA notes that the ‘‘ACTION’’ caption for this
final order is styled as ‘‘Final amendment; final
order,’’ rather than ‘‘Final order.’’ Beginning in
December 2019, this editorial change was made to
indicate that the document ‘‘amends’’ the Code of
Federal Regulations. The change was made in
accordance with the Office of Federal Register’s
(OFR) interpretations of the Federal Register Act (44
U.S.C. chapter 15), its implementing regulations (1
CFR 5.9 and parts 21 and 22), and the Document
Drafting Handbook.
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
71384
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 239 / Thursday, December 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
required to mitigate these risks in table
1.
TABLE 1—TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY EYE MOVEMENT ASSESSMENT AID RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Identified risks
Mitigation measures
Incorrect or misinterpreted results, including:
• False positive: Brain injury when in fact none is present .............
• False negative: No brain injury when in fact brain injury is
present.
Interference with other devices ................................................................
Electrical shock or burn ............................................................................
Adverse tissue reaction ............................................................................
Eye hazard or injury .................................................................................
FDA has determined that special
controls, in combination with the
general controls, address these risks to
health and provide reasonable assurance
of safety and effectiveness. For a device
to fall within this classification, and
thus avoid automatic classification in
class III, it would have to comply with
the special controls named in this final
order. The necessary special controls
appear in the regulation codified by this
order. This device is subject to
premarket notification requirements
under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act.
At the time of classification, traumatic
brain injury eye movement assessment
aids are for prescription use only.
Prescription devices are exempt from
the requirement for adequate directions
for use for the layperson under section
502(f)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
352(f)(1)) and 21 CFR 801.5, as long as
the conditions of 21 CFR 801.109 are
met.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
III. Analysis of Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.34(b) that this action is of a type
that does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. Therefore,
neither an environmental assessment
nor an environmental impact statement
is required.
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
While this final order contains no
collection of information, it establishes
special controls that refer to previously
approved FDA collections of
information found in other FDA
regulations and guidance. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3501–3521) is not required for this
order. The previously approved
collections of information are subject to
review by OMB under the PRA. The
collections of information in the
guidance document ‘‘De Novo
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Dec 15, 2021
Jkt 256001
Clinical performance testing;
Software verification, validation, and hazard analysis; and
Labeling.
Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing; and
Software verification, validation, and hazard analysis.
Electrical safety testing; and
Software verification, validation, and hazard analysis.
Biocompatibility evaluation.
Light hazard assessment.
Classification Process (Evaluation of
Automatic Class III Designation)’’ have
been approved under OMB control
number 0910–0844; 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 part 807, subpart E,
regarding premarket notification
submissions, have been approved under
OMB control number 0910–0120; the
collections of information in 21 CFR
part 820, regarding quality system
regulation, have been approved under
OMB control number 0910–0073; and
the collections of information in 21 CFR
part 801, regarding labeling, have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0485.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 882
Medical devices.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 882 is
amended as follows:
PART 882—NEUROLOGICAL DEVICES
1. The authority citation for part 882
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e,
360j, 360l, 371.
2. Add § 882.1455 to subpart B to read
as follows:
■
§ 882.1455 Traumatic brain injury eye
movement assessment aid.
(a) Identification. A traumatic brain
injury eye movement assessment aid is
a prescription device that uses a
patient’s tracked eye movements to
provide an interpretation of the
functional condition of the patient’s
brain. This device is an assessment aid
that is not intended for standalone
detection or diagnostic purposes.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(b) Classification. Class II (special
controls). The special controls for this
device are:
(1) Clinical performance data under
anticipated conditions of use must
evaluate tracked eye movement in
supporting the indications for use and
include the following:
(i) Evaluation of sensitivity,
specificity, positive predictive value,
and negative predictive value using a
reference method of diagnosis;
(ii) Evaluation of device test-retest
reliability; and
(iii) A description of the development
of the reference method of diagnosis,
which may include a normative
database, to include the following:
(A) A discussion of how the clinical
work-up was completed to establish the
reference method of diagnosis,
including the establishment of inclusion
and exclusion criteria; and
(B) If using a normative database, a
description of how the ‘‘normal’’
population was established, and the
statistical methods and model
assumptions used.
(2) Software verification, validation,
and hazard analysis must be performed.
Software documentation must include a
description of the algorithms used to
generate device output.
(3) Performance testing must
demonstrate the electrical safety and
electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) of
the device.
(4) The patient-contacting
components of the device must be
demonstrated to be biocompatible.
(5) A light hazard assessment must be
performed for all eye-tracking and
visual display light sources.
(6) Labeling must include:
(i) A summary of clinical performance
testing conducted with the device,
including sensitivity, specificity,
positive predictive value, negative
predictive value, and test-retest
reliability;
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 239 / Thursday, December 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
(ii) A description of any normative
database that includes the following:
(A) The clinical definition used to
establish a ‘‘normal’’ population and the
specific selection criteria;
(B) The format for reporting normal
values;
(C) Examples of screen displays and
reports generated to provide the user
results and normative data;
(D) Statistical methods and model
assumptions; and
(E) Any adjustments for age and
gender.
(iii) A warning that the device should
only be used by trained healthcare
professionals;
(iv) A warning that the device does
not identify the presence or absence of
traumatic brain injury or other clinical
diagnoses;
(v) A warning that the device is not
a standalone diagnostic; and
(vi) Any instructions to convey to
patients regarding the administration of
the test and collection of test data.
Dated: December 9, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
certain nonattainment areas for the 2015
ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) and in states in the
Ozone Transport Region (OTR). Both
New York and Pennsylvania are in the
OTR. This action triggers certain CAA
deadlines for the EPA to impose
sanctions if a state does not submit a
complete SIP addressing the
outstanding requirements and for the
EPA to promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) if the EPA
does not approve the state’s SIP
revision.
This action is effective on
January 18, 2022.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
General questions concerning this
notice should be addressed to Bob
Lingard, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Air Quality Policy
Division, Mail Code: C539–01, 109 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27709; by telephone (919)
541–5272; or by email at lingard.robert@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
[FR Doc. 2021–27227 Filed 12–15–21; 8:45 am]
A. How is the preamble organized?
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
Table of Contents
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR PART 52
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0868; FRL–9251–01–
OAR]
Findings of Failure To Submit State
Implementation Plan Revisions for the
2016 Oil and Natural Gas Industry
Control Techniques Guidelines for the
2015 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and for
States in the Ozone Transport Region
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final action.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
find that the states of New York and
Pennsylvania failed to submit State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
required by the Clean Air Act (CAA) in
a timely manner to address reasonably
available control technology (RACT)
requirements associated with the 2016
Oil and Natural Gas Industry Control
Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for
reducing volatile organic compounds
(VOC). The RACT requirements
associated with the CTG apply in
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Dec 15, 2021
Jkt 256001
I. General Information
A. How is the preamble organized?
B. Notice and Comment Under the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
C. How can I get copies of this document
and other related information?
D. Where do I go if I have specific state
questions?
II. Background
III. Consequences of Findings of Failure To
Submit
IV. Findings of Failure To Submit for States
That Failed To Make a Nonattainment
Area SIP Submittal and/or Ozone
Transport Region SIP Submittal
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Executive Order 13563:
Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71385
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority and Low Income Populations
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
L. Judicial Review
B. Notice and Comment Under the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an
agency for good cause finds that notice
and public procedures are
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary
to the public interest, the agency may
issue a rule without providing notice
and an opportunity for public comment.
The EPA has determined that there is
good cause for making this final agency
action without prior proposal and
opportunity for comment because no
significant EPA judgment is involved in
making findings of failure to submit
SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by
the CAA, where states have made no
submissions to meet the requirement.
Thus, notice and public procedures are
unnecessary to take this action. The
EPA finds that this constitutes good
cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
C. How can I get copies of this
document and other related
information?
The EPA has established a docket for
this action under Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2021–0868. Publicly available
docket materials are available either
electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC,
William Jefferson Clinton Building,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC. Out of an
abundance of caution for members of
the public and our staff, the EPA Docket
Center and Reading Room are open to
the public by appointment only to
reduce the risk of transmitting COVID–
19. Docket Center staff will continue to
provide remote customer service via
email, phone, and webform. The
telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744 and
the telephone number for the Office of
Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center is (202) 566–1742.
For further information on EPA Docket
Center services and the current status,
please visit us online at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
D. Where do I go if I have specific state
questions?
For questions related to specific states
mentioned in this notice, please contact
the appropriate EPA Regional office:
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 239 (Thursday, December 16, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71383-71385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27227]
[[Page 71383]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 882
[Docket No. FDA-2021-N-0896]
Medical Devices; Neurological Devices; Classification of the
Traumatic Brain Injury Eye Movement Assessment Aid
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final amendment; final order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is classifying
the traumatic brain injury eye movement assessment aid into class II
(special controls). The special controls that apply to the device type
are identified in this order and will be part of the codified language
for the traumatic brain injury eye movement assessment aid's
classification. We are taking this action because we have determined
that classifying the device into class II (special controls) will
provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of the
device. We believe this action will also enhance patients' access to
beneficial innovative devices.
DATES: This order is effective December 16, 2021. The classification
was applicable on December 28, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Antkowiak, Center for Devices
and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 4254, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-
402-3705, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Upon request, FDA has classified the traumatic brain injury eye
movement assessment aid as class II (special controls), which we have
determined will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness. In addition, we believe this action will enhance
patients' access to beneficial innovation, by placing the device into a
lower device class than the automatic class III assignment.
The automatic assignment of class III occurs by operation of law
and without any action by FDA, regardless of the level of risk posed by
the new device. Any device that was not in commercial distribution
before May 28, 1976, is automatically classified as, and remains
within, class III and requires premarket approval unless and until FDA
takes an action to classify or reclassify the device (see 21 U.S.C.
360c(f)(1)). We refer to these devices as ``postamendments devices''
because they were not in commercial distribution prior to the date of
enactment of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976, which amended the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
FDA may take a variety of actions in appropriate circumstances to
classify or reclassify a device into class I or II. We may issue an
order finding a new device to be substantially equivalent under section
513(i) of the FD&C Act (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(i)) to a predicate device
that does not require premarket approval. We determine whether a new
device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device by means of
the procedures for premarket notification under section 510(k) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(k) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807).
FDA may also classify a device through ``De Novo'' classification,
a common name for the process authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the
FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization
Act of 1997 established the first procedure for De Novo classification
(Pub. L. 105-115). Section 607 of the Food and Drug Administration
Safety and Innovation Act modified the De Novo application process by
adding a second procedure (Pub. L. 112-144). A device sponsor may
utilize either procedure for De Novo classification.
Under the first procedure, the person submits a 510(k) for a device
that has not previously been classified. After receiving an order from
FDA classifying the device into class III under section 513(f)(1) of
the FD&C Act, the person then requests a classification under section
513(f)(2).
Under the second procedure, rather than first submitting a 510(k)
and then a request for classification, if the person determines that
there is no legally marketed device upon which to base a determination
of substantial equivalence, that person requests a classification under
section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act.
Under either procedure for De Novo classification, FDA is required
to classify the device by written order within 120 days. The
classification will be according to the criteria under section
513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act. Although the device was automatically placed
within class III, the De Novo classification is considered to be the
initial classification of the device.
When FDA classifies a device into class I or II via the De Novo
process, the device can serve as a predicate for future devices of that
type, including for 510(k)s (see section 513(f)(2)(B)(i) of the FD&C
Act). As a result, other device sponsors do not have to submit a De
Novo request or premarket approval application to market a
substantially equivalent device (see section 513(i) of the FD&C Act,
defining ``substantial equivalence''). Instead, sponsors can use the
less-burdensome 510(k) process, when necessary, to market their device.
II. De Novo Classification
On December 22, 2017, FDA received Oculogica, Inc.'s request for De
Novo classification of the EyeBOX[supreg]. FDA reviewed the request in
order to classify the device under the criteria for classification set
forth in section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
We classify devices into class II if general controls by themselves
are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness, but there is sufficient information to establish special
controls that, in combination with the general controls, provide
reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for
its intended use (see section 513(a)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act). After
review of the information submitted in the request, we determined that
the device can be classified into class II with the establishment of
special controls. FDA has determined that these special controls, in
addition to the general controls, will provide reasonable assurance of
the safety and effectiveness of the device.
Therefore, on December 28, 2018, FDA issued an order to the
requester classifying the device into class II. In this final order,
FDA is codifying the classification of the device by adding 21 CFR
882.1455.\1\ We have named the generic type of device traumatic brain
injury eye movement assessment aid, and it is identified as a
prescription device that uses a patient's tracked eye movements to
provide an interpretation of the functional condition of the patient's
brain. This device is an assessment aid that is not intended for
standalone detection or diagnostic purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ FDA notes that the ``ACTION'' caption for this final order
is styled as ``Final amendment; final order,'' rather than ``Final
order.'' Beginning in December 2019, this editorial change was made
to indicate that the document ``amends'' the Code of Federal
Regulations. The change was made in accordance with the Office of
Federal Register's (OFR) interpretations of the Federal Register Act
(44 U.S.C. chapter 15), its implementing regulations (1 CFR 5.9 and
parts 21 and 22), and the Document Drafting Handbook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FDA has identified the following risks to health associated
specifically with this type of device and the measures
[[Page 71384]]
required to mitigate these risks in table 1.
Table 1--Traumatic Brain Injury Eye Movement Assessment Aid Risks and
Mitigation Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identified risks Mitigation measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect or misinterpreted results,
including:
False positive: Brain Clinical performance testing;
injury when in fact none is
present.
False negative: No brain Software verification,
injury when in fact brain injury validation, and hazard
is present. analysis; and
Labeling.
Interference with other devices........ Electromagnetic compatibility
(EMC) testing; and
Software verification,
validation, and hazard
analysis.
Electrical shock or burn............... Electrical safety testing; and
Software verification,
validation, and hazard
analysis.
Adverse tissue reaction................ Biocompatibility evaluation.
Eye hazard or injury................... Light hazard assessment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FDA has determined that special controls, in combination with the
general controls, address these risks to health and provide reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness. For a device to fall within this
classification, and thus avoid automatic classification in class III,
it would have to comply with the special controls named in this final
order. The necessary special controls appear in the regulation codified
by this order. This device is subject to premarket notification
requirements under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act.
At the time of classification, traumatic brain injury eye movement
assessment aids are for prescription use only. Prescription devices are
exempt from the requirement for adequate directions for use for the
layperson under section 502(f)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 352(f)(1))
and 21 CFR 801.5, as long as the conditions of 21 CFR 801.109 are met.
III. Analysis of Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this action is
of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
While this final order contains no collection of information, it
establishes special controls that refer to previously approved FDA
collections of information found in other FDA regulations and guidance.
Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not
required for this order. The previously approved collections of
information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections
of information in the guidance document ``De Novo Classification
Process (Evaluation of Automatic Class III Designation)'' have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0844; 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 part 807, subpart E, regarding
premarket notification submissions, have been approved under OMB
control number 0910-0120; the collections of information in 21 CFR part
820, regarding quality system regulation, have been approved under OMB
control number 0910-0073; and the collections of information in 21 CFR
part 801, regarding labeling, have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0485.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 882
Medical devices.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and
under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR
part 882 is amended as follows:
PART 882--NEUROLOGICAL DEVICES
0
1. The authority citation for part 882 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 360l, 371.
0
2. Add Sec. 882.1455 to subpart B to read as follows:
Sec. 882.1455 Traumatic brain injury eye movement assessment aid.
(a) Identification. A traumatic brain injury eye movement
assessment aid is a prescription device that uses a patient's tracked
eye movements to provide an interpretation of the functional condition
of the patient's brain. This device is an assessment aid that is not
intended for standalone detection or diagnostic purposes.
(b) Classification. Class II (special controls). The special
controls for this device are:
(1) Clinical performance data under anticipated conditions of use
must evaluate tracked eye movement in supporting the indications for
use and include the following:
(i) Evaluation of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive
value, and negative predictive value using a reference method of
diagnosis;
(ii) Evaluation of device test-retest reliability; and
(iii) A description of the development of the reference method of
diagnosis, which may include a normative database, to include the
following:
(A) A discussion of how the clinical work-up was completed to
establish the reference method of diagnosis, including the
establishment of inclusion and exclusion criteria; and
(B) If using a normative database, a description of how the
``normal'' population was established, and the statistical methods and
model assumptions used.
(2) Software verification, validation, and hazard analysis must be
performed. Software documentation must include a description of the
algorithms used to generate device output.
(3) Performance testing must demonstrate the electrical safety and
electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) of the device.
(4) The patient-contacting components of the device must be
demonstrated to be biocompatible.
(5) A light hazard assessment must be performed for all eye-
tracking and visual display light sources.
(6) Labeling must include:
(i) A summary of clinical performance testing conducted with the
device, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value,
negative predictive value, and test-retest reliability;
[[Page 71385]]
(ii) A description of any normative database that includes the
following:
(A) The clinical definition used to establish a ``normal''
population and the specific selection criteria;
(B) The format for reporting normal values;
(C) Examples of screen displays and reports generated to provide
the user results and normative data;
(D) Statistical methods and model assumptions; and
(E) Any adjustments for age and gender.
(iii) A warning that the device should only be used by trained
healthcare professionals;
(iv) A warning that the device does not identify the presence or
absence of traumatic brain injury or other clinical diagnoses;
(v) A warning that the device is not a standalone diagnostic; and
(vi) Any instructions to convey to patients regarding the
administration of the test and collection of test data.
Dated: December 9, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-27227 Filed 12-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P