Medtech Insight is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By


Device History Record ‘Oversights’ A Clear Path To Quality Troubles, FDA Says

This article was originally published in The Silver Sheet

Executive Summary

Manufacturers are overlooking various key elements that should be included in device history records, including up-to-date labels, dates of product manufacture and missing signatures on documents, FDA says. Because DHRs touch virtually every part of a firm’s quality system, a flawed DHR can prompt agency investigators to dig deeper during inspections. Further, DHRs with absent signatures, test records or traceability records might cause investigators to doubt the validity of a manufacturer’s quality system. Experts also urge companies to make sure that device history records link to device master records, and they remind firms that DHRs are also tethered to production and process control requirements. Some manufacturers are in the beginning stages of implementing electronic device history records in an effort to curb mistakes and unnecessary costs.

You may also be interested in...

Design Control Snapshot: Advice About Design Change, Files, Inputs And More

From our digital archives: Device changes and design history files are integral aspects of design control that work hand-in-hand and should not be overlooked by manufacturers, industry experts said. Firms should keep copious records of design changes that can later be reviewed in a design history file (DHF); otherwise they could encounter what one expert dubbed “change creep.” This happens when a manufacturer makes numerous changes to a product, “and then all of a sudden we have a design that doesn’t even look like the original device,” John Gagliardi of MidWest Process Innovation said in December 2012. Further, firms should ensure that human factors are taken into consideration when design inputs are gathered.

Anatomy Of A Unique Device Identifier: It’s Flexible

Manufacturers will have leeway when creating product labels under FDA’s proposed UDI rule. Firms would be allowed to purchase an identifier from a UDI-issuing agency of its choice, although the agency strongly endorses the use of identifiers from GS1 and HIBCC. FDA’s Jay Crowley describes three different types of UDI labels.

BrightGene Bets On Remdesivir Amid Patent Questions

Despite many uncertainties, Suzhou-based BrightGene sees a bet on generic remdesivir worthy of a $700,000 investment.



Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts