An Analysis of Adverse Event Reports in FDA’s MAUDE Database
Main Article Content
Keywords
MAUDE, FDA, Adverse Events Reports, Medical Devices, Vigilance
Abstract
Background and Objective: Medical devices (MDs) play a pivotal role in the modern healthcare environment. Adverse events are an expected part of an MD’s lifecycle. To prevent the recurrence of such events, various vigilance systems have been established worldwide. The Manufacturer and User facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is a publicly accessible database that contains data of medical device reports (MDRs) submitted to FDA since 1991. The aim of this study is to examine the evolution of MD adverse event reports and analyze several characteristic parameters, as they evolved during the last three decades.
Material and Methods: An analysis of MAUDE data was performed to examine the outcomes and device characteristics of adverse event reports from 1991 up to 11/2022. These outcomes included the event type, remedial action, report source, reporter occupation and device evaluation by manufacturer. Specific MD groups were analyzed separately to examine their effect on the event outcomes. Segregated files of the database that contain different types of information on adverse event reports were combined to investigate the various aspects of these reports.
Results: Event outcomes are presented as annual histograms. An overall of about 15 million reports have been submitted to MAUDE during the 30 years period examined with more than 2.5 million of them during the first 10 months of the year 2022. This number is growing at an increasing rate. Most of the events (63.5%) have resulted in simple device malfunction, without serious implications to the patient. Depending on the device type however, the health risks may be higher (98.4% injuries from specific dental implants and 3.2% deaths from implantable defibrillators). About 20% of the reports have led to recalls or other corrective actions. Most of the reports (96%) are submitted by manufacturers and over 70% of the devices returned to them are evaluated, following the requirements of FDA 21 CFR, 803. The reporter’s occupation was found to be related to the types of devices associated with the event. Finally, the average device age was found to be 4 years, with an increasing tendency observed over the years, while still most of the events occur during the first year of operation.
Conclusion: A medical device adverse event reporting system is a critical component of safety in the use of medical technology in modern healthcare. The information available in MAUDE and its use continues to grow at an accelerated rate and allows critical improvements of MDs, especially in terms of risk prevention, as it gives perception about their safety issues. FDA has taken various steps to encourage and facilitate adverse event reporting and make the data available to the public.
Downloads
References
2. FDA. About Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) [Internet]. FDA; 2023 [cited 2023 Apr 11]. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/mandatory-reporting-requirements-manufacturers-importers-and-device-user-facilities/about-manufacturer-and-user-facility-device-experience-maude
3. FDA. 2023 Medical Device Reporting (MDR): How to Report Medical Device Problems. [cited 2023 Apr 11]. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/medical-device-safety/medical-device-reporting-mdr-how-report-medical-device-problems
4. EUDAMED database - EUDAMED [Internet]. [cited 2023 Apr 11]. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/tools/eudamed/#/screen/home
5. Government of Australia Department of Health and Aged Care. Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Safety monitoring: Medical devices [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2023 Apr 11]. Available from: https://www.tga.gov.au/safety/safety/safety-monitoring-medical-devices
6. Government of Canada - Health Canada. Find recalls, advisories and safety alerts – Canada.ca [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2023 Apr 11]. Available from: https://recalls-rappels.canada.ca/en
7. MHRA.GOV.UK. 2023 [cited 2023 Apr 11]. Alerts, recalls and safety information: drugs and medical devices. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/drug-device-alerts
8. Federal Institute for Drug and Medical Devices. Field corrective actions [Internet]. [cited 2023 Apr 11]. Available from: https://www.bfarm.de/EN/Medical-devices/Tasks/Risk-assessment-and-research/Field-corrective-actions/_node.html
9. Malataras P, Pallikarakis N. Spin-off use of adverse events data: why and how. The case of FDA’s MAUDE. Global CE J. 2018;1(1):9–23.
10. Rayess HM, Svider PF, Hanba C, Patel VS, DeJoseph LM, Carron M, et al. A Cross-sectional Analysis of Adverse Events and Litigation for Injectable Fillers. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2018 May 1;20(3):207–14.
11. Rahimpour S, Kiyani M, Hodges SE, Turner DA. Deep brain stimulation and electromagnetic interference. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2021 Apr;203:106577.
12. Carey J, Gabbireddy S, Mammen L, Rosamilia G, Patel V, Foyt D, et al. FDA MAUDE database analysis of titanium middle ear prosthesis. J Otol. 2022 Jan;17(1):18–24.
13. Tong JY, Pasick LJ, Benito DA, Monfared A, Sataloff RT. Adverse Events Associated With Ossicular Prostheses: Utility of a Federal Database. Otol Neurotol. 2022 Feb 1;43(2):e229–34.
14. Alhusain R, Dayco J, Awadelkarim A, Almas T, Halboni A, Ahmed AK, et al. Turnpike Catheter failure, causes and mechanisms: Insights from the MAUDE database. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022 Jun;78:103923.
15. Ensign LG, Cohen KB. A Primer to the Structure, Content and Linkage of the FDA’s Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) Files. EGEMS (Wash DC). 5(1):12.
16. Kavanagh KT, Brown RE, Kraman SS, Calderon LE, Kavanagh SP. Reporter’s occupation and source of adverse device event reports contained in the FDA’s MAUDE database. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2019 Jul 2;10:205–8.
17. Connor MJ, Tringale K, Moiseenko V, Marshall DC, Moore K, Cervino L, et al. Medical Device Recalls in Radiation Oncology: Analysis of U.S. Food and Drug Administration Data, 2002–2015. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Jun 1;98(2):438–46.
18. Bitar C, Krupic F, Felländer-Tsai L, Crnalic S, Wretenberg P. Living with a recalled implant: a qualitative study of patients’ experiences with ASR hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Patient Safety in Surgery. 2021 Jan 6;15(1):2.
19. Drugwatch. Drugwatch.com. [cited 2023 Apr 25]. Hip Replacement Recall | Causes and FDA Information. Available from: https://www.drugwatch.com/hip-replacement/recalls/
20. FDA. Federal Register. 2014 [cited 2023 May 3]. Medical Device Reporting: Electronic Submission Requirements. Available from: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/02/14/2014-03279/medical-device-reporting-electronic-submission-requirements
21. Zuckerman DM, Brown P, Nissen SE. Medical Device Recalls and the FDA Approval Process. Archives of Internal Medicine. 2011 Jun 13;171(11):1006–11.
22. Dubin JR, Simon SD, Norrell K, Perera J, Gowen J, Cil A. Risk of Recall Among Medical Devices Undergoing US Food and Drug Administration 510(k) Clearance and Premarket Approval, 2008-2017. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 May 3;4(5):e217274.
23. FDA [Internet]. FDA; 2023 [cited 2023 Oct 5]. Examples of Reported Infusion Pump Problems. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/infusion-pumps/examples-reported-infusion-pump-problems
24. Craig A, O’Meley P, Carter P. The Need for Greater Reporting of Medical Device Incidents. EMJ. 2019 Oct 1;3(1):56–63.
25. Knisely BM, Levine C, Kharod KC, Vaughn-Cooke M. An Analysis of FDA Adverse Event Reporting Data for Trends in Medical Device Use Error. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care. 2020 Sep 1;9(1):130–4.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Author(s) must obtain all parties consent [co-author(s), others if applicable] and submit the acceptance of Copyright Agreement with their paper. Written permission must be obtained by the author for material that has been published in copyrighted material; this includes tables, figures, and quoted text that exceeds 150 words. A copy of all permissions must accompany the manuscript when published in copyrighted material. The author(s) hereby represents and warrants that the paper is original and that he/she is the author of the paper, except for material that is clearly identified as to its original source, with permission notices from the copyright owners where required. Author(s) must clearly indicate that approval for publication has been received in cases of institutional ownership.
In all submitted material authors retain all copyrights; however, the GlobalCE Journal reserve the right to reprint all or portions of the article and to post all or part of the article online. GlobalCE Journal reserves the right to edit manuscripts as required to publish in the journal. Authors are responsible for obtaining any and all clearances as appropriate. Unless stated otherwise, all articles are open-access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and original work (e.g. first published in the Global Clinical Engineering Journal) is properly cited with the original URL and bibliographic citation information. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on www.Globalce.org well as the copyright and license information must be included. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.