Maria Raffaella Martina, Chloe Park, Jordi Alastruey, Rosa Maria Bruno, Rachel Climie, Soner Dogan, Bilge Guvenc Tuna, Ana Jerončić, Marjan Manouchehri, Andrie G Panayiotou, Silvia Tamarri, Dimitrios Terentes-Printzios, Marisa Testa, Areti Triantafyllou, Christopher C Mayer, Elisabetta Bianchini
{"title":"Medical device regulation in vascular ageing assessment: a VascAgeNet survey exploring knowledge and perception.","authors":"Maria Raffaella Martina, Chloe Park, Jordi Alastruey, Rosa Maria Bruno, Rachel Climie, Soner Dogan, Bilge Guvenc Tuna, Ana Jerončić, Marjan Manouchehri, Andrie G Panayiotou, Silvia Tamarri, Dimitrios Terentes-Printzios, Marisa Testa, Areti Triantafyllou, Christopher C Mayer, Elisabetta Bianchini","doi":"10.1080/17434440.2024.2334931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Regulation has a key role for medical devices throughout their lifecycle aiming to guarantee effectiveness and safety for users. Requirements of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (MDR) have an impact on novel and previously approved systems. Identification of key stakeholders' needs can support effective implementation of MDR improving the translation to clinical practice of vascular ageing assessment. The aim of this work is to explore knowledge and perception of medical device regulatory framework in vascular ageing field.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>A survey was developed within VascAgeNet and distributed in the community by means of the EUSurvey platform.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results were derived from 94 participants (27% clinicians, 62% researchers, 11% companies) and evidenced mostly a fair knowledge of MDR (despite self-judged as poor by 51%). Safety (83%), validation (56%), risk management (50%) were considered relevant and associated with the regulatory process. Structured support and regulatory procedures connected with medical devices in daily practice at the institutional level are lacking (only 33% report availability of a regulatory department).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Regulation was recognized relevant by the VascAgeNet community and specific support and training in medical device regulatory science was considered important. A direct link with the regulatory sector is not yet easily available.</p>","PeriodicalId":94006,"journal":{"name":"Expert review of medical devices","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert review of medical devices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2024.2334931","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Regulation has a key role for medical devices throughout their lifecycle aiming to guarantee effectiveness and safety for users. Requirements of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (MDR) have an impact on novel and previously approved systems. Identification of key stakeholders' needs can support effective implementation of MDR improving the translation to clinical practice of vascular ageing assessment. The aim of this work is to explore knowledge and perception of medical device regulatory framework in vascular ageing field.
Research design and methods: A survey was developed within VascAgeNet and distributed in the community by means of the EUSurvey platform.
Results: Results were derived from 94 participants (27% clinicians, 62% researchers, 11% companies) and evidenced mostly a fair knowledge of MDR (despite self-judged as poor by 51%). Safety (83%), validation (56%), risk management (50%) were considered relevant and associated with the regulatory process. Structured support and regulatory procedures connected with medical devices in daily practice at the institutional level are lacking (only 33% report availability of a regulatory department).
Conclusions: Regulation was recognized relevant by the VascAgeNet community and specific support and training in medical device regulatory science was considered important. A direct link with the regulatory sector is not yet easily available.