PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 2774725

FDA recalls: how do pacemaker manufacturers compare?

Abstract

To evaluate an apparent perception that there is no difference in reliability among the products of the major cardiac pacing system manufacturers, an extensive review of US Food and Drug Administration regulatory actions was performed. The study period was July 1974 through June 1987. The total number of affected devices was collected for each manufacturer. Available sales data were used to calculate their percentage of recalled products during two time periods. The percentage of potentially high-risk devices (Food and Drug Administration class I and II recalls) was high for one company, moderate for one, and relatively low for the rest. Potential biases in some other sources of reliability information, as well as implications for regulatory policies, are discussed. The data reported establish that there have been past deficiencies in recall management. Although further pacing device recalls are probable, appropriate early regulatory and manufacturer action should help to assure that both the immense cost and patient distress caused by pacer and related product problems in the past can be minimized in the future.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G F Tyers. 1989. FDA recalls: how do pacemaker manufacturers compare?. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-4975(10)62864-0

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Tip cooling effect and failure mechanism of field-emitting carbon nanotubes.

The cooling effect accompanying field electron emission has been considered for a single carbon nanotube (CNT) used as a field emission (FE) electron source. An improved model for the failure mechanism of field emitting CNTs has been proposed and validated. Our model predicts a maximum temperature (T-max) located at an interior point rather than the tip of the CNTs, and the failure of the CNT emitters tends to take place at the T-max point, inducing a segment by segment breakdown process. A combination of Joule heating and electrostatic force effect is proposed responsible for initiating the failure of the field emitting CNT and validated by in situ FE observation.

Equipment Failure↗

[Importance of an initial check-up for diagnostic radiology apparatus management].

The management of apparatus for diagnostic imaging is an important job for radiological technologists. In the last 10 years we have encountered 2227 malfunctions in 3652 days. We detected 163 cases at the initial check-up, which accounted for 7.3% of total cases. By performing an initial check-up, we detected one malfunction every 21 days and were able to keep the effects of mishaps to a minimum, prevent accidents, and obtain stable-quality images.

Equipment Failure↗