FDA medical device approval process under fire
A series of high profile recalls led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to seek recommendations for how the medical device approval system could be improved. Recently, defective product recalls involving Medtronic defibrillators and DuPuy artificial hips have drawn significant attention to how the FDA grants approval for medical devices. These and many other medical devices were approved under a fast-track process known as 510(k). According to at least one group, the process is inherently flawed.
The institute of Medicine (IOM) released a report claiming the fast-track process fails to properly protect patients. They concluded that the process should be scrapped and replaced with an entirely different regulatory framework. The FDA and the manufacturers of medical devices were quick to label this proposal as reactionary. They believe that the problems can be addressed under the basic guidelines of the 510(k) process.
Much of the concern stems from an aspect of the fast-track process that allows medical devices to be used on patients more quickly if the device is similar to existing devices. Roughly 4,000 devices were approved in 2009 under this provision. While that provision is popular among medical device manufacturers, it does not go far enough to protect patients in the view of the IOM.
Victims of defective medical devices must be able to protect their rights. Defective devices are a threat to the public and will continue to cause injury and death as long as they are on the market. By pursuing legal action, victims of defective products can help the FDA identify malfunctioning devices and issue recalls to protect others from harm.
Source: MSNBC.com, "U.S. advisers call for overhaul of FDA device approval process," Andrew Seaman, 29 July, 2011
Watch A Quick Video:
*AV®, AV Preeminent®, Martindale-Hubbell Distinguished and Martindale-Hubbell Notable are certification marks used under license in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedures, standards and policies. Martindale-Hubbell® is the facilitator of a peer review rating process. Ratings reflect the anonymous opinions of members of the bar and the judiciary. Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ fall into two categories — legal ability and general ethical standards.
**Board certification is not required to practice law in Illinois, and the Illinois Supreme Court does not recognize specialties in the practice of law.
What Our Clients Say
- Just wanted to take a moment to say thank you. I know a lot of hard work, by all of you, went into the preparation of this case and we wanted you to know that it is greatly appreciated. We worried about many things during that period, but one thing we didn't worry about was our attorneys. What a fine team you make! You guys are great! Read More
- I wanted to touch base with everyone again to express my thanks to everyone involved in the USAir 1016 case for the way the case was handled and the way you treated myself and my family. While I realize that there are other law firms that could have tried the case, I don't believe they could have matched the caring you showed us... Read More
- How do we thank you for doing such a tremendous job with the lawsuit against Freeport Memorial Hospital?...The day that check arrived I was so nervous, in fact I was a wreck until we had it safely invested. I am not thanking you just as our attorney, but as a very good friend...Read More
- We would like to take this opportunity to express our heartfelt thanks for the supportive service that you have given our family during the past three years. While we wish that we would not have found ourselves in a situation requiring your services, we are grateful for the sensitive way...Read More
Email Us For a Response
Have Questions? We Have Answers.
Tell us about your case and we’ll get back to you with a FREE case evaluation.
Bold labels are required.
Premier Personal Injury & Wrongful Death Attorneys
Call 877-216-4213 or Email Us For A Free Initial Consultation