儿科设备创新:食品与药物管理局授权随时间推移的分析。

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Jonathan Dubin, Krish Sardesai, Caleb Grote, Caroline Tougas, Katherine Branche, Norman Otsuka
{"title":"儿科设备创新:食品与药物管理局授权随时间推移的分析。","authors":"Jonathan Dubin, Krish Sardesai, Caleb Grote, Caroline Tougas, Katherine Branche, Norman Otsuka","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.23.01211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite a tremendous increase in the number of orthopaedic devices authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), novel devices designed specifically for the pediatric population remain sparse. Surgeons frequently repurpose adult implants for \"off-label\" use in pediatric patients, with both legal and technical ramifications. This study seeks to objectively quantify and characterize the nature of pediatric device innovation over time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The FDA employs 4 pathways for assessing safety and effectiveness of novel devices prior to authorization. Perceived device risk and novelty determine the pathway. Orthopaedic devices were identified from the FDA's online database. All devices approved since inception via the Humanitarian Device Exemption, Pre-Market Approval, and De Novo regulatory pathways were included and grouped as \"highly innovative.\" Because of their number and the rapidity of their development, the evaluation of 510(k) devices was limited to those cleared from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2022. Such 510(k) devices make up ∼97% of devices and by definition are less risky and less novel. Approval statements were assessed for pediatric indications within the approved labeling. As a secondary analysis, the impact of company size on developing a product with a pediatric indication was analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1,925 devices cleared via the 510(k) pathway, 9 (0.5%) were designed exclusively for pediatrics and 160 (8.3%) included pediatric indications. Five of the 9 pediatrics-only devices were for spine and 4 were for trauma indications. Of the 97 highly innovative devices, only 2 (2%) were exclusively pediatric and another 2 (2%) included pediatric indications. The 2 pediatrics-only devices were for the spine. Large and medium-sized companies were 1.9 times and 1.6 times more likely to bring to market a device with pediatric indications than a small company, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Innovation for pediatric orthopaedic devices lags substantially behind that for adult orthopaedic devices. These findings are consistent with clinical experience and the common practice of modifying adult implants for \"off-label\" use in pediatric patients. Despite long-standing efforts to stimulate innovation for this vulnerable population, our results suggest little progress.</p>","PeriodicalId":15273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","volume":" ","pages":"1594-1599"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pediatric Device Innovation: An Analysis of Food and Drug Administration Authorizations Over Time.\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Dubin, Krish Sardesai, Caleb Grote, Caroline Tougas, Katherine Branche, Norman Otsuka\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/JBJS.23.01211\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite a tremendous increase in the number of orthopaedic devices authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), novel devices designed specifically for the pediatric population remain sparse. Surgeons frequently repurpose adult implants for \\\"off-label\\\" use in pediatric patients, with both legal and technical ramifications. This study seeks to objectively quantify and characterize the nature of pediatric device innovation over time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The FDA employs 4 pathways for assessing safety and effectiveness of novel devices prior to authorization. Perceived device risk and novelty determine the pathway. Orthopaedic devices were identified from the FDA's online database. All devices approved since inception via the Humanitarian Device Exemption, Pre-Market Approval, and De Novo regulatory pathways were included and grouped as \\\"highly innovative.\\\" Because of their number and the rapidity of their development, the evaluation of 510(k) devices was limited to those cleared from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2022. Such 510(k) devices make up ∼97% of devices and by definition are less risky and less novel. Approval statements were assessed for pediatric indications within the approved labeling. As a secondary analysis, the impact of company size on developing a product with a pediatric indication was analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1,925 devices cleared via the 510(k) pathway, 9 (0.5%) were designed exclusively for pediatrics and 160 (8.3%) included pediatric indications. Five of the 9 pediatrics-only devices were for spine and 4 were for trauma indications. Of the 97 highly innovative devices, only 2 (2%) were exclusively pediatric and another 2 (2%) included pediatric indications. The 2 pediatrics-only devices were for the spine. Large and medium-sized companies were 1.9 times and 1.6 times more likely to bring to market a device with pediatric indications than a small company, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Innovation for pediatric orthopaedic devices lags substantially behind that for adult orthopaedic devices. These findings are consistent with clinical experience and the common practice of modifying adult implants for \\\"off-label\\\" use in pediatric patients. Despite long-standing efforts to stimulate innovation for this vulnerable population, our results suggest little progress.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1594-1599\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.01211\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.01211","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)授权的骨科器械数量大幅增加,但专为儿童设计的新型器械仍然很少。外科医生经常将成人植入物重新用于儿科患者的 "标签外 "用途,这既涉及法律问题,也涉及技术问题。本研究旨在客观量化和描述儿科器械创新的性质:美国食品和药物管理局采用 4 种途径对新型器械的安全性和有效性进行授权前评估。感知器械风险和新颖性决定了评估途径。从 FDA 的在线数据库中确定了骨科器械。其中包括了所有自成立以来通过人道主义器械豁免、上市前批准和新产品监管途径获得批准的器械,并将其归类为 "高度创新"。由于 510(k) 设备数量众多且发展迅速,因此对它们的评估仅限于 2018 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 12 月 31 日期间获得批准的设备。此类 510(k) 设备占设备总数的 97%,顾名思义,风险较低,新颖性较低。在已批准的标签中,对儿科适应症的批准声明进行了评估。作为辅助分析,还分析了公司规模对开发儿科适应症产品的影响:在通过 510(k) 途径获得批准的 1,925 种器械中,有 9 种(0.5%)专为儿科设计,160 种(8.3%)包含儿科适应症。在 9 款儿科专用器械中,5 款用于脊柱,4 款用于创伤。在 97 种高度创新的器械中,只有 2 种(2%)是专门为儿科设计的,另外 2 种(2%)包括儿科适应症。其中 2 种仅用于儿科的器械用于脊柱。大型公司和中型公司向市场推出儿科适应症器械的可能性分别是小型公司的1.9倍和1.6倍:结论:儿科骨科器械的创新远远落后于成人骨科器械。这些发现与临床经验以及将成人植入物修改为 "标签外 "用于儿科患者的常见做法是一致的。尽管长期以来一直在努力促进针对这一弱势群体的创新,但我们的结果表明进展甚微。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pediatric Device Innovation: An Analysis of Food and Drug Administration Authorizations Over Time.

Background: Despite a tremendous increase in the number of orthopaedic devices authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), novel devices designed specifically for the pediatric population remain sparse. Surgeons frequently repurpose adult implants for "off-label" use in pediatric patients, with both legal and technical ramifications. This study seeks to objectively quantify and characterize the nature of pediatric device innovation over time.

Methods: The FDA employs 4 pathways for assessing safety and effectiveness of novel devices prior to authorization. Perceived device risk and novelty determine the pathway. Orthopaedic devices were identified from the FDA's online database. All devices approved since inception via the Humanitarian Device Exemption, Pre-Market Approval, and De Novo regulatory pathways were included and grouped as "highly innovative." Because of their number and the rapidity of their development, the evaluation of 510(k) devices was limited to those cleared from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2022. Such 510(k) devices make up ∼97% of devices and by definition are less risky and less novel. Approval statements were assessed for pediatric indications within the approved labeling. As a secondary analysis, the impact of company size on developing a product with a pediatric indication was analyzed.

Results: Of the 1,925 devices cleared via the 510(k) pathway, 9 (0.5%) were designed exclusively for pediatrics and 160 (8.3%) included pediatric indications. Five of the 9 pediatrics-only devices were for spine and 4 were for trauma indications. Of the 97 highly innovative devices, only 2 (2%) were exclusively pediatric and another 2 (2%) included pediatric indications. The 2 pediatrics-only devices were for the spine. Large and medium-sized companies were 1.9 times and 1.6 times more likely to bring to market a device with pediatric indications than a small company, respectively.

Conclusions: Innovation for pediatric orthopaedic devices lags substantially behind that for adult orthopaedic devices. These findings are consistent with clinical experience and the common practice of modifying adult implants for "off-label" use in pediatric patients. Despite long-standing efforts to stimulate innovation for this vulnerable population, our results suggest little progress.

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
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.50%
发文量
660
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) has been the most valued source of information for orthopaedic surgeons and researchers for over 125 years and is the gold standard in peer-reviewed scientific information in the field. A core journal and essential reading for general as well as specialist orthopaedic surgeons worldwide, The Journal publishes evidence-based research to enhance the quality of care for orthopaedic patients. Standards of excellence and high quality are maintained in everything we do, from the science of the content published to the customer service we provide. JBJS is an independent, non-profit journal.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信