报告的器械失效和冠状病毒大流行:心血管干预

E. Zhou, S. Bhatia
{"title":"报告的器械失效和冠状病毒大流行:心血管干预","authors":"E. Zhou, S. Bhatia","doi":"10.1115/dmd2022-1019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Regular cardiology practices were interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. To better understand the pandemic’s effects on cardiology practices, we investigated whether the pandemic affected reporting of cardiovascular medical device failure by examining whether adverse event reports per week attributed to different cardiovascular devices changed significantly during the pandemic. By using data from FDA’s MAUDE database, we compared weekly rates of adverse event reports over the course of three years attributed to each of four devices: ‘Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (Non-CRT)’, ‘Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent’, ‘Aortic Valve, Prosthesis, Percutaneously Delivered’, and ‘Heart Valve, Non-Allograft Tissue’. Specifically, we looked at trends per week for the adverse events 'Malfunction’, ‘Injury’, and ‘Death’ for March 2018-March 2019, the pre-pandemic year of March 2019-March 2020, and the pandemic year March 2020-March 2021. We report a 46% decrease in reported deaths attributed to ICDs, a 27% decrease in reported injuries attributed to coronary DES, a 107% increase in reported deaths and a 45% increase in reported malfunctions attributed to percutaneous aortic valve prostheses, as well as a 27% decrease in reported injuries attributed to non-allograft tissue heart valves (all comparisons pandemic to pre-pandemic). That these four cardiovascular medical devices did not homogeneously increase or decrease suggests that changing care patterns that differently affected each device were the root of these trends, rather than a broader factor like underreporting which one would expect to affect the devices similarly.","PeriodicalId":236105,"journal":{"name":"2022 Design of Medical Devices Conference","volume":"124 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reported Device Failure and the Coronavirus Pandemic: Cardiovascular Interventions\",\"authors\":\"E. Zhou, S. Bhatia\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/dmd2022-1019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Regular cardiology practices were interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. To better understand the pandemic’s effects on cardiology practices, we investigated whether the pandemic affected reporting of cardiovascular medical device failure by examining whether adverse event reports per week attributed to different cardiovascular devices changed significantly during the pandemic. By using data from FDA’s MAUDE database, we compared weekly rates of adverse event reports over the course of three years attributed to each of four devices: ‘Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (Non-CRT)’, ‘Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent’, ‘Aortic Valve, Prosthesis, Percutaneously Delivered’, and ‘Heart Valve, Non-Allograft Tissue’. Specifically, we looked at trends per week for the adverse events 'Malfunction’, ‘Injury’, and ‘Death’ for March 2018-March 2019, the pre-pandemic year of March 2019-March 2020, and the pandemic year March 2020-March 2021. We report a 46% decrease in reported deaths attributed to ICDs, a 27% decrease in reported injuries attributed to coronary DES, a 107% increase in reported deaths and a 45% increase in reported malfunctions attributed to percutaneous aortic valve prostheses, as well as a 27% decrease in reported injuries attributed to non-allograft tissue heart valves (all comparisons pandemic to pre-pandemic). That these four cardiovascular medical devices did not homogeneously increase or decrease suggests that changing care patterns that differently affected each device were the root of these trends, rather than a broader factor like underreporting which one would expect to affect the devices similarly.\",\"PeriodicalId\":236105,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2022 Design of Medical Devices Conference\",\"volume\":\"124 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2022 Design of Medical Devices Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/dmd2022-1019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 Design of Medical Devices Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/dmd2022-1019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

正常的心脏病学实践因COVID-19大流行而中断。为了更好地了解大流行对心脏病学实践的影响,我们通过检查在大流行期间每周归因于不同心血管装置的不良事件报告是否发生显著变化,来调查大流行是否影响心血管医疗器械失效的报告。通过使用FDA MAUDE数据库的数据,我们比较了三年来四种设备的每周不良事件报告率:“植入式心律转复除颤器(非crt)”,“冠状动脉药物洗脱支架”,“主动脉瓣,假体,经皮输送”和“心脏瓣膜,非同种异体移植组织”。具体而言,我们研究了2018年3月至2019年3月、2019年3月至2020年3月的大流行前年和2020年3月至2021年3月的大流行年,每周的不良事件“故障”、“伤害”和“死亡”的趋势。我们报告了由icd引起的死亡报告减少了46%,由冠状动脉DES引起的损伤报告减少了27%,由经皮主动脉瓣假体引起的死亡报告增加了107%,由非同种异体组织心脏瓣膜引起的损伤报告增加了45%(所有的大流行与大流行前的比较)。这四种心血管医疗设备并没有均匀地增加或减少,这表明改变护理模式对每种设备的影响不同,这是这些趋势的根源,而不是一个更广泛的因素,如漏报,人们会期望对设备产生类似的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reported Device Failure and the Coronavirus Pandemic: Cardiovascular Interventions
Regular cardiology practices were interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. To better understand the pandemic’s effects on cardiology practices, we investigated whether the pandemic affected reporting of cardiovascular medical device failure by examining whether adverse event reports per week attributed to different cardiovascular devices changed significantly during the pandemic. By using data from FDA’s MAUDE database, we compared weekly rates of adverse event reports over the course of three years attributed to each of four devices: ‘Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (Non-CRT)’, ‘Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent’, ‘Aortic Valve, Prosthesis, Percutaneously Delivered’, and ‘Heart Valve, Non-Allograft Tissue’. Specifically, we looked at trends per week for the adverse events 'Malfunction’, ‘Injury’, and ‘Death’ for March 2018-March 2019, the pre-pandemic year of March 2019-March 2020, and the pandemic year March 2020-March 2021. We report a 46% decrease in reported deaths attributed to ICDs, a 27% decrease in reported injuries attributed to coronary DES, a 107% increase in reported deaths and a 45% increase in reported malfunctions attributed to percutaneous aortic valve prostheses, as well as a 27% decrease in reported injuries attributed to non-allograft tissue heart valves (all comparisons pandemic to pre-pandemic). That these four cardiovascular medical devices did not homogeneously increase or decrease suggests that changing care patterns that differently affected each device were the root of these trends, rather than a broader factor like underreporting which one would expect to affect the devices similarly.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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