Development of a minimum checklist to assess the quality of evidence produced using registry data for the evaluation of medical device safety and performance.

IF 1.6 Q2 SURGERY
BMJ Surgery Interventions Health Technologies Pub Date : 2025-10-29 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjsit-2024-000364
Lotje A Hoogervorst, Rob G H H Nelissen, Tom Melvin, Paul Piscoi, Chris Wilkinson, Anne Lubbeke, Chris P Gale, David Epstein, Soren Overgaard, Phil Walmsley, Piotr Szymanski, Maziar Mohaddes, Donal B O'Connor, Robert E Geertsma, Joëlle M Hoebert, Alan G Fraser, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen
{"title":"Development of a minimum checklist to assess the quality of evidence produced using registry data for the evaluation of medical device safety and performance.","authors":"Lotje A Hoogervorst, Rob G H H Nelissen, Tom Melvin, Paul Piscoi, Chris Wilkinson, Anne Lubbeke, Chris P Gale, David Epstein, Soren Overgaard, Phil Walmsley, Piotr Szymanski, Maziar Mohaddes, Donal B O'Connor, Robert E Geertsma, Joëlle M Hoebert, Alan G Fraser, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen","doi":"10.1136/bmjsit-2024-000364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Medical device registries in Europe report limited information about their structure and methodological characteristics. This hinders their utility for evaluation of medical device safety and performance under the Medical Device Regulation. This study aimed to define a minimum checklist of items necessary for regulators to assess the quality of evidence produced using registry data for the evaluation of medical device safety and performance.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A three-round Delphi panel.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>A task within the Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices project.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>101 experts in the medical device community (healthcare professionals, methodologists, registry experts, regulators, and assessors from notified bodies) were invited.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Based on a literature review and expert advice, 27 items relating to the quality of registry data and the analysis of medical device safety and performance were selected. In round 1, participants selected which items were required for a minimum checklist. They could also propose new items. Items selected by ≥70% of participants indicated consensus. Remaining items were discussed in round 2, resulting in a final checklist that was ranked by participants for importance (round 3).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Consensus of items to be included in the minimum checklist.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>51 experts participated in round 1, achieving consensus on 18 (67%) items and suggesting 12 items. After discussion in round 2, 5 additional items were selected, resulting in a final set of 15 data quality items and 8 data analysis items. The most important items were 'completeness of procedures' (data quality) and 'definition of outcome analyzed'\" (quality of analysis).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Reporting all items from the minimum checklist will facilitate judgment of the utility of registry data to evaluate medical devices during post-market surveillance.</p>","PeriodicalId":33349,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Surgery Interventions Health Technologies","volume":"7 1","pages":"e000364"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12574368/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Surgery Interventions Health Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsit-2024-000364","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Medical device registries in Europe report limited information about their structure and methodological characteristics. This hinders their utility for evaluation of medical device safety and performance under the Medical Device Regulation. This study aimed to define a minimum checklist of items necessary for regulators to assess the quality of evidence produced using registry data for the evaluation of medical device safety and performance.

Design: A three-round Delphi panel.

Setting: A task within the Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices project.

Participants: 101 experts in the medical device community (healthcare professionals, methodologists, registry experts, regulators, and assessors from notified bodies) were invited.

Interventions: Based on a literature review and expert advice, 27 items relating to the quality of registry data and the analysis of medical device safety and performance were selected. In round 1, participants selected which items were required for a minimum checklist. They could also propose new items. Items selected by ≥70% of participants indicated consensus. Remaining items were discussed in round 2, resulting in a final checklist that was ranked by participants for importance (round 3).

Main outcome measures: Consensus of items to be included in the minimum checklist.

Results: 51 experts participated in round 1, achieving consensus on 18 (67%) items and suggesting 12 items. After discussion in round 2, 5 additional items were selected, resulting in a final set of 15 data quality items and 8 data analysis items. The most important items were 'completeness of procedures' (data quality) and 'definition of outcome analyzed'" (quality of analysis).

Conclusions: Reporting all items from the minimum checklist will facilitate judgment of the utility of registry data to evaluate medical devices during post-market surveillance.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

制定一份最低限度的核对表,以评估利用登记数据产生的证据的质量,以评价医疗器械的安全性和性能。
目的:欧洲的医疗器械注册报告有关其结构和方法学特征的有限信息。这阻碍了它们在医疗器械法规下评估医疗器械安全性和性能的效用。本研究旨在定义监管机构评估医疗器械安全性和性能评估使用注册数据产生的证据质量所需的最低项目清单。设计:三轮德尔福面板。设置:医疗器械协调研究和证据项目中的一项任务。参与者:邀请了医疗器械界的101名专家(来自公告机构的保健专业人员、方法学家、注册专家、监管机构和评估人员)。干预措施:根据文献综述和专家意见,选择了与登记数据质量和医疗器械安全性和性能分析有关的27个项目。在第一轮中,参与者选择哪些项目是最小清单所必需的。他们也可以提出新的项目。≥70%的参与者选择的项目表示一致。剩下的项目在第二轮进行讨论,产生一个最终的清单,由参与者根据重要性进行排名(第三轮)。主要结果测量:对最小清单中要包括的项目达成共识。结果:第一轮共有51位专家参与,18项(67%)达成共识,建议12项。经过第2轮的讨论,我们又选择了5个项目,最终得到了15个数据质量项目和8个数据分析项目。最重要的项目是“程序的完整性”(数据质量)和“分析结果的定义”(分析质量)。结论:报告最小清单中的所有项目将有助于判断注册数据在上市后监督期间评估医疗器械的效用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书