The author defines what a MEDDEV is, recent updates and information resources to learn more.
The most important part of my website is the “Helpful Links.” These are the links that I use most in Regulatory Affairs. It started as an auditor’s toolbox, but now I am morphing it into a place to review updates to regulatory requirements and external standards. The MEDDEV’s are on the top of my list. These are the guidance documents written by Competent Authorities, but most of the Notified Bodies treat them as requirements, and often write nonconformities against at least one of them: MEDDEV 2.12/1 – Medical Device Vigilance System.
Many companies rely on RSS feeds to keep them current on the latest external standards, but this doesn’t work for a MEDDEV. For MEDDEV’s, your best bet is to go to the source. Sure, you can hire a consultant that will try and keep you current. You can also wait until your NB auditor lets you know the hard way (i.e,. – time to write another administrative CAPA).
For those of you who don’t know the source, it is my #1 “Helpful Link”:
When asked how to keep current, my advice is to have a systematic process for checking various sources of external documents. At a minimum, you should be checking all of the possible sources just prior to each Management Review. This will give you something to include for the requirement in clause 5.6.2h) of the ISO 13485:2003 Standard. “More preferably,” as lawyers would say, check out the website link above at least once per month. For those of you that are completely out of touch, and those that just fell off the University hay ride, the following explains why you can’t get away with saying:
“There haven’t been any new or revised regulatory requirements since the last Management Review.”
There were several updates to the MEDDEVs released as supporting documents for the M5 version of the MDD (93/42/EEC as modified by 2007/47/EC). Specifically, there were four in December, 2009 and one in June, 2010. Then there were two more MEDDEVs released in December, 2010 related to clinical study requirements in Europe. In January, 2012, another six MEDDEVs were released, and one more was released in March. Not all of these updates apply to every company, but every RA professional working on CE Marked products has been busy reading themselves to sleep at night.
I could spend some time here telling you a couple of sentences about each of these new MEDDEVs, but someone already did that for me:
One fellow blogger indicated that the MEDDEV 2.5/10, about Authorized Representatives (ARs), was disruptive:
I don’t really agree with Erik Vollebregt about it being disruptive. Erik feels that we can all expect substantial revisions in the AR contracts, but I think the Germany AR’s I have worked with were already moving in this direction. Emergo has been a strong AR all along—with a distinctly more friendly Dutch style to their processes. In the end, I just don’t see Notified Bodies (NBs) making these contracts a priority initiative. I think we’ll see more auditors verifying that contracts are in place and current, but I don’t expect auditors to receive guidance on how to review contracts anytime soon.
The real changes will be in the smaller AR’s that are not European Association of Authorized Representatives (EAAR) members. The Competent Authorities (CAs) have been knocking on the door of various “wanabee” AR’s for a few years now. I think they have done a nice job of shutting down illegitimate representatives, and the member companies of EAAR (http://www.eaarmed.org/) have done well in raising awareness. The next logical step was to provide some guidance, so that there is more consistency among the ARs. I see this as just the beginning of the CA’s moving toward one approach.
Another article was written by Erik about MEDDEV 2.12/2 on the subject of Post-Market Clinical Follow-up (PMCF):
Erik just touched on this MEDDEV briefly, but if your company is a manufacturer of a Class III device that is CE Marked—YOU NEED TO READ THIS MEDDEV!
As in all things post-market related, BSI has taken the lead by publishing an article that is almost as long as the original MEDDEV. This white paper was written by Dr. Hamish Forster, BSI’s Orthopedic & Dental Product Expert, and the document is called “The Post-Market Priority.” I think you can only obtain a copy of this white paper by requesting it from BSI online, but the customer service person that follows up is quite polite.
BSI’s leadership role in PMCF is not new either. Gert Bos gave a presentation that highlighted the importance of PMCF back on March 31, 2010:
My advice for anyone that has a Class III device that is CE Marked is to read this MEDDEV a few times, Annex X 1.1c of the MDD, read the whitepaper and review these presentations by Gert Bos. This will help you prepare for what is coming. For those of you that think you know something about PMCF, and have justified why your company doesn’t need to do it, think again. You should review the 16 bullet points in the MEDDEV on page 14 and 15 (17 bullets in the whitepaper, but one was just split into two parts). Identify how many of these points apply to your Class III device. The more points that apply to your product, the more extensive the NB’s will expect your PMCF plans to be.