Tag: PMS

Posted on by

US IVD Classification – How different can it be?

IVDeology have decades of IVD (invitro diagnostics) compliance support experience within the Quality and regulatory industry, with backgrounds from microbiology to lab based experience, and recently becoming part of the Abingdon Health PLC to offer a more holistic range of services from cradle to grave of diagnostic products. Co-founder and Director of training Nancy Consterdine talks about the US classifications of devices, having worked recently with US 510K submissions including pre-submissions.

The Global Harmonisation Task Force (GHTF) published their classification guidance in June 2006 proposing a risk based, 4 tier classification system for In Vitro Diagnostic Devices. This guidance has been widely used since 2006 for new regulatory systems being set up around the world e.g. the IVD Regulation in Europe 2017/746.

However, the United States of America (US) had already introduced a 3-tier risk-based classification system back in 1976 with the amendments to the Food, Drug and Cosmetics act (FD&C) to include medical devices. This system has now been in place for 48 years, despite amendments having been made around the regulatory pathways e.g. introduction of the 510K De Novo program, enacting of the Small Business Determination program and electronic submission processes. So, how does the classification system work currently and what are the future changes that the FDA are proposing?

Figure above shows class |, || and ||| and risk (explained below)

Class 1

  • Low to Moderate Risk devices e.g. Transport culture medium, immunoelectrophoretic equipment, Biological stains
  • Subject to General Controls (Regulatory Requirements which apply to all medical devices) all covered under a quality management system:

    – Registration of producers of medical devices.
    – Notifications and other remedies e.g. recall.
    – Records and reports on devices e.g. adverse event report.
  • Manufacturers are still visible to FDA and may be subject to audit.
  • Devices may be exempted from a General Control as stated in the classification regulation for that device e.g. they may be exempt from GMP other than keeping records and complaint files.
  • Devices are submitted via the 510K pre-market notification process but some are exempt.

Class II

  • Moderate to High Risk e.g. Blood Culture Assay, Rubella ELISA Test
  • Subject to General Controls and Special Controls:
    – Device specific
    – Evidence of meeting performance standards
    – Post market surveillance
    – Adherence to guidelines
    – Special labelling requirement
  • General Controls are considered insufficient to provide assurance of safety and effectiveness.
  • Devices are submitted for pre-market notification via 510K process.

Class III

  • High Risk e.g. Cancer Biomarker companion diagnostic assay
  • Subject to General Controls and Premarket Approval:
    – Quality Management processes and controls
    – Software design, development and cyber security
    – Analytical Verification data
    – Clinical Performance Data
  • Pre-Market Approval (PMA) application is required

Recent Developments

In January 2024, a press release from Jeff Shuren, the director of the Centre for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) announced the intent to initiate the reclassification process for most IVDs which are currently class III (high risk) into class II (moderate risk). They identified that the majority of these tests are infectious disease and companion diagnostic IVDs. This is in line with the FDA least burdensome approach allowing manufacturers of some devices to seek marketing clearance through the 510K premarket notification route. In the release it also talked to the FDA desire to encourage more manufacturers to develop the test and in turn increase competition and access to these important tests.

The process of reclassification has already started with a panel meeting in September 2023 identifying 3 types of infectious disease diagnostic IVDs

  • Nucleic acid and serology based IVDs to aid diagnosis of Hepatitis B Virus infection and management of infected patients.
  • Serology based IVDs for detection of human parvovirus B19.
  • Cell mediated immune reactivity IVDs to aid identification of in vitro responses to peptide antigens associated with TB infection.

Conclusion

The IVD industry can only welcome these moves by the FDA in conjunction with the amendment of the Quality Management System regulation (QMS) to be more closely aligned to the ISO 13485:2016 standard. It makes the USA a far more inviting prospect for initial market authorisation applications. The costs are transparent, the timelines are clearly identified and there is a process in place to present and discuss the device with the FDA in a pre-submission meeting.

There are however other considerations that need to be taken, Jeff Shuren has recently announced his retirement and Dr Michelle Tarver will assume the role of CDRH Acting Director. Also, there are presidential elections this year, will these changes impact the current trajectory of the CHRH? We at IVDeology will continue to monitor the situation across the pond, it is evident that since Brexit the UK government has been eager to foster recognition of other regulatory body approvals and it does feel that the movement of the FDA approval process is going in the same direction as that of the UK MDR.

Next steps to consider, and how we can help.

IVDeology Ltd can support with all of the above, please contact us for a friendly conversation to identify how we can support you with your compliance journey via our contact page

Posted on by

MDSAP: Explaining the complexities and importance

The Medical Device Single Audit Programme (MDSAP) is a system by which the participant competent authorities to recognise the quality management certification (as awarded after audit against both ISO 13485 and county specific requirements) from a single authority for medical device and in-vitro diagnostic medical device (IVDs) legal manufacturers.

The programme has been established by the International Medical Device Regulators Forum (IMDRF) and is intended to provide a harmonised approach to demonstrating the compliance of the Quality Management System (QMS) using a globally recognised approach.

The MDSAP was developed by the IMDRF to:

  • Enable appropriate regulatory oversight of medical device manufacturers’ quality management systems while minimizing regulatory burden on industry;
  • Promote more efficient and flexible use of regulatory resources through work sharing and mutual acceptance among regulators while respecting the sovereignty of each authority;
  • Promote globally, in the longer term, a greater alignment of regulatory approaches and technical requirements based on international standards and best practices;
  • Promote consistency, predictability and transparency of regulatory programs by standardizing;

    1. the practices and procedures of participating regulators for the oversight of third party auditing organizations, and
    2. the practices and procedures of participating third party auditing organizations

Regulatory Authorities

MDSAP consists of Regulatory Authority Council Members, Observers and Affiliate members:

Regulatory Authority Council Members:

  • Therapeutic Goods Administration of Australia
  • Brazil’s Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária
  • Health Canada
  • Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency
  • U.S. Food and Drug Administration

The RAC is the decision-making body of MDSAP and consists of representatives from all regulatory authorities that are members of the RAC. The RAC provides direction, oversight, and resources to support the MDSAP development, implementation, maintenance, and expansion.

Observer Members:

  • European Union (EU)
  • Singapore’s Health Sciences Authority (HSA) (NEW)
  • United Kingdom’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)
  • The World Health Organization (WHO) Prequalification of In Vitro Diagnostics (IVDs) Programme

The observers do not observe RAC members and do not attend RAC meetings, but they do observe and contribute the RAC activities. Both the EU and UK have been Observers for over 2 years, and as such, can apply to become full RAC members if desired.

Affiliate Members:

  • Argentina’s National Administration of Drugs, Foods and Medical Devices (ANMAT)
  • Ministry of Health of Israel
  • Kenya’s Pharmacy and Poisons Board (New member)
  • Republic of Korea’s Ministry of Food and Drug Safety
  • Federal Commission for Protection from Sanitary Risks (COFEPRIS) of Mexico
  • TFDA – Taiwan Food and Drug Administration

Affiliate members are not members of the RAC or an Official Observer, but engages in MDSAP, demonstrates understanding of MDSAP and utilizes MDSAP audit reports and MDSAP certificates for evaluating compliance with applicable medical device requirements, including a manufacturer’s quality management system, under the Affiliate Member’s regulatory framework.

The application of the MDSAP Programme

The utilisation of the MDSAP programme, and the resulting certificates are utilised differently depending on each Competent Authority as dedicated by each regional requirement.

Regulatory AuthorityUtilisation of MDSAP
AustraliaMDSAP audit report is used as part of the evidence that it has assessed for compliance with medical device market authorization requirements, unless excluded or exempt from these requirements.
BrazilANVISA utilizes the outcomes of the program as part of the pre-market and post market assessment.  
CanadaManufacturers intending to place a product on the market in Canada must have an MDSAP Certification issued by an Auditing Organization.
JapanThe Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) and Pharmaceutical and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) utilize these audit reports in pre-market and post-market audits.
United StatesU.S. FDA will accept the MDSAP audit reports as a substitute for FDA routine inspections under a 510(k) device application. The use of MDSAP is not utilised for pre-approval or post-approval inspections for Pre-Market Approval (PMA) applications.

The regulations for the above Regulatory Authorities are available (English) from the USA FDA Website.

The use of the MDSAP programme and certification will be greater utilised as he programme expands and more regulatory authorities recognise the value in this process.

The MDSAP Audit Cycle and Auditing Organisations

Auditing Organisation are certification bodies that have successfully applied, and been recognised by the MDSAP programme to audit medical device manufacturers against the requirements of the MDSAP programme. The current list includes many European Notified Bodies (under EU IVDR), and UK Approved Bodies (under UKCA) and are globally recognised.

The MDSAP audit is typically build on to the existing ISO 13485 certification audit of the Quality Management System with a 3-year audit cycle.

Figure 1 MDSAP Certification Cycle

Will MDSAP come to the EU and UK?

There is much talk regarding the use of MDSAP by the EU and UK. While I am a strong advocate in global harmonisation, the existing members joined MDSAP to find a harmonised way to create a robust process for standardising QMS requirements from a position where they needed to find a suitable and robust process. Regardless of the state of play in the EU and UK, both regions already have robust mechanisms for the surveillance of ISO 13485, largely provided by the technical and commercial expertise of EU and UK Notified Bodies and Approved Bodies (as part of ISO13485 certification/IVDR conformity assessment), so the utilising MDSAP would be less impactful.

The opportunity would be regarding the outward facing regulatory convergence of EU and UK to align, and reduce burden for accessing other markets, MDSAP would be a good way of doing this. We have seen TGA become well placed in MDSAP/IMDRF mainly utilising CE marking for supporting AUS market access.

The challenge with MDSAP is that each jurisdiction has specific requirements, which make the MDSAP process clunky. The key to an improved model is to remove local requirements as much as possible, however this is dependent on global alignment at a political as well as regulatory level.

References

If you’d like to discuss MDSAP with us, you can book a call with the IVDeology team as we navigate this new programme and what it means for you as a manufacturer or provider of IVD’s and devices with each of the individual requirements. Being part of BIVDA (British In Vitro Diagnostics association), we’re in a great position to be able to receive and understand information and distribute to our networks as it comes, in a reliable and digestible way.

Or if you’d like support in other areas of Quality assurance or regulatory compliance, we’d be happy to chat with you. We can support with Quality management system implementation, transfer or uplifting.

We’ll be keeping you up to date with MDSAP news on our LinkedIn page and website, so do follow up on our socials and keep up to date with IVDeology along with Abingdon Health PLC.

Written by Stuart Angell, MD and Co-founder of IVDeology and IVDeology UKRP

Posted on by

A QMS isn’t just for IVDR conformity assessment…. it’s for life!

In this blog we are going to discuss our views on the benefits and need to have and maintain your Quality Management System (also known as a ‘QMS’)

IVDeology have decades of experience supporting IVD companies and manufacturers all across the globe with their Compliance journey within Quality and regulatory, and Jo Angell, our Quality and operations coordinator at IVDeology talks about the importance of a QMS that can grow with you, having experienced managing IVDeology’s own Quality management system internally at IVDeology as well as setting up and hosting other companies QMS.

What is a QMS?

  • Quality is defined as the “degree to which a set of inherent characteristics of an object fulfils requirements” [ISO 9000:2015, 3.6.2]
  • A management system is a set of interrelated or interacting elements of an organization to establish policies and objectives, and processes to achieve those objectives. [ISO 9000:2015, 3.5.3]

The 2 main standards covering QMS for Medical Device (including In Vitro Diagnostic (IVD)) manufacturers are:

For medical laboratories, where IVDs are used or developed as a Lab Developed Test (LDT) the additional ISO 15189:2022 Medical laboratories — Requirements for quality and competence, can be utilised.

Why have one?

It is true that establishing and maintaining a Quality Management System requires additional investment, both financially and from a resource perspective, there are substantial benefits for having one:

  • Demonstrates to customers your commitment to quality
  • Standardisation of processes
  • Consistent training throughout the organisation
  • Ensures continuous improvement
  • Improved productivity and efficiency
  • Reduced waste steps
  • Improved customer satisfaction
  • Ensures controls are in place to make safe and effective products
  • Identification and control of risks
  • Control and assessment of suppliers

An effective QMS can provide a solid foundation of quality and safety in a consistent and well-organised ecosystem

You will need one if you are intended to place IVDs on market

For the EU the IVDR states that: “all manufacturers should have a quality management system and a post market surveillance system in place which should be proportionate to the risk class and type of device in question”

As a legal manufacturer of an IVD or medical device a QMS must be implemented and compliant to the applicable regulations where you place your device on market. For EU CE marking under the new IVDR transitional timelines,  this shall be no later than 25th May 2025. This is less than 12 months away!

Who’s responsible for maintaining the QMS?

Typically, this is the role of the Quality contact in any organisation. However, establishing a quality culture, and ensuring the QMS has been built, and maintained effectively is the role of the organisations top management. They need to demonstrate leadership and a commitment to the QMS.

Maintaining your QMS

A good and efficient QMS supports your company with the best way to do things, by having input from across the organisation these processes can be agreed on and will be committed by everyone in your organisation. An effective QMS should be everyone’s objective, not just Quality!

A QMS should grow as your organisation grows

A QMS is not a one size fits all, it needs to build and grow with your organisation and will never be a finished article, it should always be continually improving. The complexity and scope should also reflect the nature and size of your organisation.

eQMS are great but…

Electronic QMS software provide a great tool, but you need to build the QMS with you in mind. These will never be an off the shelf ready to go package. All templates will need to be customised and adapted to fit your organisation and processes, otherwise the QMS just won’t work.

You have the certificate and placed the product on market – but what next?

In a previous blog, we discuss the challenge of Post Market Surveillance, and what is expected , mainly from a UK point of view:

“The manufacturer shall institute and keep up to date a systematic procedure to review experience gained from devices in the post-production phase and to implement appropriate means to apply any necessary corrective actions, taking account of the nature and risks in relation to the product.”

This means that as manufacturers you still need to be collecting data on how effective your device is – monitoring your customer complaints and feedback, any incident reporting, your manufacturing information, looking at your trends, to mention just a few possible sources of information. This data should then be reviewed to determine whether any updates are required and if so, these actions should be documented appropriately. Potential updates could impact your:

  • Risk Management File – Is the Severity of the risks impacted? Does it impact your frequency of occurrence of known risks? Are there new risks that you haven’t included?
  • Instructions for Use & Labelling – Do you need to add additional warnings? Are your instructions clear enough?
  • Training – Is any training that you provide sufficient? Is additional training necessary for your users?
  • Other products – Does the issue impact other devices you manufacture

5 Top Tips from the team on how to effectively build and maintain a QMS

  1. Get buy in from senior management – if they don’t understand what a QMS is, and why it is important (and not just required), it will never be supported and managed effectively.
  2. It is a growing, living thing, the more you feed it, the stronger and more robust it will be. It needs love and attention to get the most out of it.
  3. QMS software will save you time and money in the long run.
  4. Most non-conformances are raised against your own processes, not the standard. Make your procedures as simple and as clear as possible, ensure the people doing the work are involved in creating the processes, they know their processes the best!
  5. Use internal audits to strengthen and improve your QMS and use your business risk assessments as a tool to help the business overcome challenges and move on new opportunities

If you’ve got this far, you’ll hopefully understand the importance of a fully functioning and certified QMS but may be worried about where to start. At IVDeology (an Abingdon Health company) we offer full service solutions for QMS amongst our nose-to-tail regulatory support services. We can support you by:

  1. Being Legal Manufacturer (all QMS responsibility lies with us)
  2. Build your QMS for you
  3. Host your QMS within our ISO certified system or we can put you in touch with Cognidox, a QMS system we use at IVDeology ourselves

Our team of experts have a proven track record for the development and maintenance of Quality Management System ranging from SME to large IVD manufacturers. To hear more about how we can support, please contact [email protected] or click ‘get in touch’ to book in with our customer success coordinator

Posted on by

Performance Evaluation: The critical component in bringing your product to market and keeping it there

Abingdon Health and IVDeology Ltd have decades of  In-Vitro Diagnostic (IVD) regulatory compliance experience where our teams support your entire product journey from ‘cradle-to-grave’ to ensure you are getting your product to market in the quickest timeframe possible, reducing cost and strain, and keeping it compliant through its lifetime.

Abingdon Health also offer full-service contract development and manufacturing for lateral flow assays, bringing your idea to commercial success, with the benefit of an integrated regulatory and quality approach.

In our latest blog, Candice Vendettuoli Head of RAQA at Abingdon Health covers the importance of getting your Performance Evaluation (PE) right to streamline your route to market, and ensuring compliance to keep it there.

What is Performance Evaluation?

The In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) 2017/746, which entered into force in May 2017 and applied in May 2022, has introduced significant changes to the way in vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical devices are regulated in the European Union. One of the key aspects of this regulation are the new requirements for documenting the performance evaluation of IVD medical devices using a prescriptive document structure mandated within the Regulation.

Performance evaluation under IVDR is expected to be a continuous process throughout its entire lifecycle of the device. This process is crucial for ensuring that the device meets upon entry to the market, and continues to meet, the intended clinical benefits and safety as claimed by the manufacturer.

The mandated documents should be written to provide a comprehensive and structured narrative for the reviewer giving a clear and logical explanation of how the device was developed, verified and validated against the intended use/purpose claimed by the manufacturer. These documents are a requirement of the Technial Documentation described in Annex II and forms an essential part of the submission to the Notified Body

The mandated documents, unless they can justify why such studies are not applicable are as follows:

Performance Evaluation Plan

Ideally written during the early development of the device and updated regularly, this document has content prescribed within Annex XIII section 1.1 of the Regulation. Manufacturers are required to establish and regularly update the performance evaluation plan that outlines the device’s characteristics and performance, as well as the process and criteria used to generate the necessary clinical evidence.

Scientific Validity

The concept of scientific validity under the In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) 2017/746 is a cornerstone in the performance evaluation of in vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical devices. It refers to the association of an analyte with a clinical condition or physiological state, which must be substantiated with a medical-scientific rationale evidenced through a systematic literature search

Analytical Performance

Analytical performance refers to a device’s ability to accurately and reproducibly measure an analyte, marker, or molecule, which is a strictly technical performance without the need for correlation with a targeted pathology.  There are analytical performance characteristics mandated within Annex I section 9.1(a) including assessing the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity,

Clinical Performance

Clinical performance is defined as the ability of a device to yield results that are correlated with a particular clinical condition, physiological or pathological process, or target population and intended user. Manufacturers must demonstrate clinical performance through one or more of the following:

  • Clinical performance studies, carried out according to the IVDR requirements on clinical performance studies described in Articles 57-77, Annex XIII section 2 and, if applicable, Annex XIV for studies other than those using leftover samples
  • Scientific peer-reviewed literature on the device under evaluation, or
  • Published routine diagnostic testing.

Performance Evaluation Report

The report (also known as a ‘PER’) provides a summary of the clinical evidence collected through the previous reports. An assessment can then be made against the current state of the art in diagnostics and medicine that a positive benefit-risk ratio of using the device for its intended purpose has been met and then all data has been collected.

This rigorous approach ensures the reliability and effectiveness of in vitro diagnostic devices within the European Union, with the primary aim of protecting public health by requiring high levels of safety and performance of these devices to be evidenced.

For manufacturers, understanding and adhering to the IVDR’s performance evaluation requirements is vital for successful market introduction of their IVDs in the European Market. It involves a comprehensive understanding of the general safety and performance requirements (GSPR), as well as the specific guidelines on performance evaluation stipulated in Article 56 of the IVDR.

Abingdon Health and through its subsidiary IVDeology Ltd , can offer support and guidance to help companies navigate these new and complex EU Performance Evaluation requirements.

We offer a full-service solution for all your regulatory and quality requirements including:

Contact Us today to book some time with one of our industry experts to understand how we can support you bringing your product to market and keeping it there.

 

Posted on by

Role of the UK Responsible Person and the importance for future regulations

Following on from the Statement of Policy intent on international recognition of medical devices released by the MHRA on 21 May 2024, it is clear that the role of the UK Responsible Person will still be important in the future regulations for the UK.  This will be irrespective of whether devices will be placed on the market under the UKCA mark or using one of the recognition pathways from a comparable regulator country (CRC).

A UK Responsible Person (UKRP) is “a person established in the United Kingdom who acts on behalf of a manufacturer established outside the United Kingdom in relation to specified tasks with regard to the manufacturer’s obligations under these regulations.”

There has been a requirement for non-UK medical device & IVD manufacturers to appoint a UKRP in order to place their devices on the Great Britain (England, Wales & Scotland) market since the beginning of 2021. 

A letter of designation must be created and signed by both the manufacturer and the UKRP to officially appoint the UKRP to act on behalf of the manufacturer.  This letter is required to be uploaded as part of the registration process with the MHRA.

The UKRP responsibilities include:

  • ensuring that the declaration of conformity and technical documentation are correct and available if required by the MHRA
  • register the manufacturer, device and any importers with the MHRA
  • liaise with the MHRA for any requests of documentation, samples of devices and with regards to any preventative or corrective actions
  • inform the manufacturer of any complaints or any incidents related to the device
  • terminate the agreement and inform the MHRA if the manufacturer does not comply with the regulations

Selecting your UK Responsible Person should take careful consideration.  It is important that manufacturers appoint someone with the right experience to help with this process.  The manufacturer needs to be confident that the UKRP will be fulfilling their obligations on the manufacturer’s behalf and consequently the UKRP should be considered a critical supplier.  It is important that the manufacturer is assured that if there is a vigilance case identified on the Great Britain market, the UKRP knows how to engage with the MHRA and will communicate the issue in the correct time scales. The manufacturer also needs to be assured that the UKRP can assist with post market reporting and may also deliver regulatory updates which may affect the ability to continue to place devices on the Great Britain market. 

This especially will become more important as the new regulations come into effect.  The government responses to the consultation on the future regulations released in June 2022 indicates that a “Qualified Person” would be required to be permanently and continuously at the disposal of a UKRP.  This “Qualified Person” would need to meet minimum qualifications and/or regulatory experience in the field of medical devices or IVDs. This role is expected to be similar to the Person Responsible for Regulatory Compliance (PRRC) for the IVD Regulation and therefore it will be important for manufacturers to ensure that the selected UKRP can fulfil this requirement.  The UKRP name will also need to be included on the label, although this may be via over-labelling and the MHRA are also investigating the possibilities around digital labelling.

At IVDeology we offer a UK Responsible Person service.  We currently have a number of different customers from across Europe and the US and between them we have registered 489 products with the MHRA to date.

Our onboarding process involves the appropriate contract and letter of designation, followed by a technical review of the devices to be registered by one of our team.  Once confident that everything is in place, the manufacturer and devices are registered with the MHRA.  The process can and has been completed very quickly when a complete technical file has been provided to us for review.

One of the biggest challenges we have faced is around GMDN codes.  The MHRA registration process utilises GMDN codes to register the devices.  Often this has not been considered by manufacturers or the selected codes haven’t been reviewed to ensure that they are still current and appropriate for the device in question.  This can often lead to a delay in being able to register and ultimately placing the device on the UK market.

As a UKRP, we also provide Post Market Surveillance reports for our customers annually and keep them updated with any new relevant information released from the MHRA on future regulations.  This will be more important as the Post Market Surveillance is implemented and also to ensure that our UKRP customers continue to meet the changing regulatory requirements for the UK.

In summary, to place medical devices or IVD’s on the Great Britain market, there is already an established requirement to have a UK Responsible Person.  Whilst currently there are limited restrictions on who this person can be other than they have to be based in the UK and many manufacturers have enlisted their distributor or a UK office to fulfil this role, moving forward it will be more important to ensure that the UKRP that you have selected has the right level of expertise and experience to help support you place your device on the Great Britain market.

You can find out more about our UK Responsible Service here or book a call with one of our team.

Written by Regulatory Specialist Fiona Thompson, IVDeology Ltd and IVDeology UKRP

 

Posted on by

IVDeology Partners with MedBoard

Cutting through the Regulatory Noise: Our new partnership with MedBoard

It seems that the medical device regulatory world has gone into overdrive in the last few years. The rate of regulatory change and the demand for clear guidance around them has substantially increased, especially when you focus on the European Union and the UK which are th key areas IVDeology specialise in. It is now getting to the point where one regultory expert simply cannot know everything they need to know, and this is without the peripheral requirements of REACH, CLP, Sustainability, Environmental and Digital. The need to find the right information from a trusted source has never been so important, as well as in a timely manner.

Our Regs Consultant Fiona Thompson commented the following:


“When I left my previous role to start at IVDeology, finding relevant, correct regulatory updates was one of the things I found most challenging. Having come from a large company, this was all done at a Corporate level and at our site we found out information from notifications or changes to the Global procedures sent out. Out of this corporate world, the places I knew where to look for information had all disappeared and trying to find all the potential websites to set up personnel alerts, I will be honest, was very painful – and I’m still sure I haven’t found them all.”

Even from the early days of IVDeology, the aim was to develop a strong team connected to a wide and diverse industry network, which would help us inform our customers on any Quality and Regulatory updates relating to IVDs and Medical Devices. We do this knowing that many of our SME customer don’t have this network themselves and getting the right information can be a very difficult and time-consuming thing.


Recently we have started using a system called MedBoard – and what a game-changer this is!


“MedBoard is a dedicated search engine for the sector. You can set up customised reviews with relevant key words to keep up to date with new regulatory news in specific countries that you are interested in as well as conduct searches for PMS, literature searches etc. It also sends you email alerts when new information is released. What MedBoard does is provide you with a starting point for regulatory intelligence, based on trusted resources, this allows you the opportunity to build your understanding and supplement your existing knowledge network.”

How do we use MedBoard to support our customers?


IVDeology have used the MedBoard subscription services since early 2023 as we personally find the subscription beneficial to cut through the noise and share the industry updates that are tailored and beneficial to our customers.
IVDeology is proud to funnel information down to our customers and recommend MedBoard’s services and be able to add:

a) timely regualatory updates from a trusted source
b) offer insights on the impact of these updates, using our in-depth knowledge of the IVD indsutry

The outcome for this is to give you the ability to make informed decisions, develop strategies and mitigate changes to the IVD industry relevant to your devices and markets.

At IVDeology, we don’t believe these is a one size fits all model for what we do, as we are committed to helping you in the way that works best.

We’re happy to be able to share updates from MedBoard and put you in touch if you wish to sign up individually as a company to be able to personalise the package at which level you wish, as MedBoard offer several layers of package support depending on budget and need including a new artificial intelligence scanning tool as well as software Validation documents approach for QMS/GxPs processes overviews.

IVDeology adds a layer of support to help explain and discuss the updates and how this may affect your company, teams and projects. This sits well alongside our existing compliance services including UK Responsible Person (UKRP), Person Responsible for Regulatory compliance (PRRC), training, ad-hoc and project support. You can find more about these services on our website.


And to support one step further, IVDeology have a certified team of Quality experts in ISO9001 and ISO13485 to help with implementation of QMS systems and remediation, including software validation.


We don’t make anything from sign ups, we just really think the tool is an excellent creation, and side by side we can create a support system of clear updates whilst also breaking it down into easy digestible actions which saves you valuable time.

For further information or a demonstration on how we can help you, please book a call with Casey or drop us an email at [email protected] to know more.