Does Your Organization’s Post-Market Clinical Follow-Up (PMCF) Plan Adequately Reflect the Intensity Required in the Clinical Evaluation Report (CER) Under the Newest Medical Device Regulations?
Post-market clinical follow-up (PMCF) requirements have increased under the newest Medical Device Regulations (MDR) 2017/745. All medical devices will be required to meet these standards, and the deadline is here. The possible 1-year extension for the application of MDR might give manufacturers a little wiggle room to achieve compliance, but not much.
The European Commission (EC) states in a nutshell that one of the reasons for the new regulations is to strengthen post-market surveillance requirements for manufacturers.
The goals for these new regulations are to:
Improve the quality, safety, and reliability of medical devices
Strengthen transparency of information for consumers
Enhance vigilance and market surveillance
The EC considers these newest regulations as providing extremely important improvements to modernize the current system and, therefore, medical device manufacturers need to make every effort to be compliant or risk further delays in obtaining a CE marking for their device.
The PMCF plan must establish processes that proactively and systematically collect information from a variety of sources. These sources include serious incidents, Periodic Safety Update Reports (PSUR), field safety corrective actions, inputs on non-serious injury, undesirable side-effects, trend reports, literature, databases, registers, feedback and complaint sources form users, distributers and importers, as well as publicly available information on similar medical devices (MDR 2017/745, Annex III).
The PMCF plan should document the method in which the PMCF should be performed. Therefore, the PMCF plan needs to specify the methods and procedures that will be used by the manufacturer to proactively collect the clinical data and the data’s subsequent evaluation. The plan’s aims are to:
Confirm the safety and performance of the device throughout its expected lifetime,
Identify previously unknown side-effects and monitoring the identified side-effects and contraindications,
Identifying and analyze emergent risks on the basis of factual evidence,
Ensure the continued acceptability of the benefit-risk ratio referred to in Sections 1 and 9 of Annex I, and
Identify possible systematic misuse or off-label use of the device with a view to verify that the intended purpose is correct.
Choosing the post-market data to be collected in the PMCF plan is not an easy or straightforward task. The plan must include pertinent parameters to ensure the device is safe and effective. However, including too many or irrelevant variables may result in low response rates and/or missing data. The manufacturer should also consider that some data will be visible to the public. Indeed, one of the goals of the new regulations is to introduce transparency into the system to keep the general public informed, allowing patients to be more engaged in making their healthcare decisions.
The PMCF plan plays a central role under MDR 2017/745 since it lays the groundwork for the PMCF studies that subsequently interface with PSUR, Summary of Safety and Clinical Performance (SSCP), risk management files, CER updates, labeling, and IFU.
The data acquired through the application of the PMCF plan can provide strong evidence as to the safety and efficacy of the device and details about the clinical risks associated with use. Analysis of these post-market clinical data in combination with clinical literature is a powerful tool for manufacturers to improve product performance and support claims to regulatory agencies.
Getting these done is very time consuming and requires significant expertise, especially since the PMCF plan is an integral part of the quality system under MDR. The level of specificity necessary for the methods and protocols is intense.
The PMCF Plan must, at the very least, include the following:
(a) The general methods and procedures of the PMCF to be applied, such as gathering of clinical experience gained, feedback from users, screening of scientific literature and of other sources of clinical data;
(b) The specific methods and procedures of the PMCF to be applied, such as gathering of clinical experience gained feedback from users, screening of scientific literature and of other sources of clinical data;
(c) The specific methods and procedures of PMCF to be applied such as evaluation of suitable registers or PMCF studies;
(d) A rationale for the appropriateness of the methods and procedures referred to in points (a) and (b);
(e) A reference to the relevant parts of the clinical evaluation report referred to in section 4 and to the risk management referred to in Section 3 of Annex I;
(f) The specific objectives to be addressed by the PMCF
(g) An evaluation of the clinical data relating to equivalent or similar devices;
(h) Reference to any relevant CS, harmonized standards when used by the manufacturer, and relevant guidance on PMCF; and
(i) A detailed and adequately justified time schedule for PMCF activities (e.g. analysis of PMCF data and reporting) to be undertaken by the manufacturer.
At Criterion Edge, we understand how important the PMCF plan is to the success of your device’s new or annual CER and, thus, ultimately compliance with regulatory authorities and marketing in the European Union. Our experienced medical writers can provide guidance and expertise on the PMCF plan or any other aspect of your CER. If your organization needs expertise or just some breathing space for your medical writers, please reach out to us to chat.
The Role of RA in the Clinical and Performance Evaluation Process: Key Strategies to Support Project Success
Scoping Your MDR and IVDR Writing Projects - The Forgotten Step
Ask the Writers: A Comparison of Critical Elements of the SVR versus the CER State-of-the-Art and Best Practice Writing Strategies
[Ask the Expert] Tips For How to Avoid Common Notified Body Review Findings
How to Establish the Competitive Landscape Within the Scientific Validity Report
IVD Deep Dive Series Part 2
Clinical Evaluation: Measurable Objectives and Acceptance Criteria to Verify Device Safety and Performance
This white paper outlines strategies for the verification of device safety and performance as well as tips to define parameters to determine the acceptability of benefit-risk.
Post-Market Literature Surveillance: Systematic Literature Review and Case Study
[Ask the Expert] Safety and Performance Measures and Acceptance Criteria for MDR
[Ask the Expert] Safety and Performance Measures and Acceptance Criteria for IVDR
[Ask the Expert] Clinical Data for IVD: What Is It and How Do I Find It?
IVD Deep Dive Series Part 1
IVDR Essentials: Performance Evaluation Report - Early Planning and Preparation
How to Establish the State of the Art Within the Scientific Validity Report
How to Establish the State-of-the-Art Within the Scientific Validity Report
Clinical Evaluation: Measurable Objectives and Acceptance Criteria to Verify Device Safety and Performance
[Ask the Expert] The Importance of Clinical Data: Sources of Data, Literature Searches, Weighting & Appraisal and Effective Presentation in your CER or PER
[Ask the Expert] Clinical Evaluation: Measurable Objectives and Acceptance Criteria to Verify Device Safety and Performance
[Ask the Expert] Systematic Literature Review: What is it and why is it so important?
How to Establish the Competitive Landscape Within the Scientific Validity Report
[Ask the Expert] Safety and Performance Measures and Acceptance Criteria
How to Establish the State-of-the-Art Within the Scientific Validity Report
[Ask the Expert] Performance Evaluation Report
[Ask the Expert] Performance Evaluation Report
[Ask the Expert] The Importance of Clinical Data: Sources of Data, Literature Searches, Weighting & Appraisal and Effective Presentation in your CER or PER
[Ask the Expert] Safety and Performance Measures and Acceptance Criteria
A Practical Guide: Conducting Systematic Literature Reviews in Support of IVDR Readiness [Free Webinar]
In this practical presentation, Criterion Edge breaks down the steps of the SLR process and takes a wholistic approach to conducting an IVDR-compliant SLR. Using case studies, the presentation illustrates the effective use of SLR-derived data to develop the Scientific Validity Report (SVR) and the Clinical Performance Report (CPR).
Systematic Literature Review: Empower Data-Driven Decisions White Paper
This white paper is a companion piece to our popular webinar where we share our insights on using the Systematic
Literature Review (SLR) to Empower Data-Driven Decisions in your Organization.
Systematic Literature Review: How to Empower Data-Driven Decision Making [Free Webinar]
In this webinar, we share the process of systematic literature review, and discuss the tools and best practices for creating a methodologically-sound systematic literature review.
State of the Art: Building a Solid Foundation for your PER to Support IVDR Readiness
In this webinar, Dr. Sarah Chavez provides an overview of the State of the Art section, and explains how it fits into the overall process of writing a successful, IVDR-compliant Performance Evaluation Report (PER) in a reasonable time frame. A complete readiness assessment and gap analysis will help you identify critical resources, feeder documents, and expertise needed to establish that your IVD may be considered “state-of-the-art.” Ultimately, knowing what the Notified Body expects to see will help you avoid project delays and discover efficiencies in the SOA development process.
A Practical Guide: Conducting Systematic Literature Reviews for IVDR Readiness
This white paper is a companion piece to our popular webinar where we break down the steps of the systematic literature review (SLR) process and take a wholistic approach to conducting an In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR)- compliant SLR.
State of the Art: Establishing a Solid Foundation for Your PERs to Encourage IVDR Readiness
This white paper is a companion piece to our popular webinar where we cover the state of the art process and how it
fits into the In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR).
Sign Up to be Notified of Our Upcoming Webinars!
Schedule a Free Consult Today!
Fill out this form, or contact us at info@criterionedge.com, and we would be happy to answer any of your questions as well as book you an appointment to discuss your project needs during a time that works for you.
Are You Reg. Ready? Get your medical affairs team primed to manage new regulatory requirements
In this discussion, we provide an overview of how to plan and coordinate change within an organization to meet upcoming EU IVDR regulatory requirements. We will be highlighting key steps involved in helping medical affairs transition to a more rigorous regulatory environments, and how to evaluate talent gaps, team leadership composition, and process challenges of your product portfolio.
Effective Corporate Scientific Communications White Paper
This white paper is a companion piece to our popular webinar where we share some of the best approaches we have
discovered for Corporate Scientific Communication Strategies.
Driving Innovation to Success in the Market: Strategic Considerations
In this discussion, our panel of proven leaders discuss the key elements that support and propel the innovation process in the medical device, pharmaceutical, and IVD industries. We will be highlighting key areas of the process, important players in the pathway to the market, and how successful innovations spawn new innovations in new markets such as the digital health space, and more.
Hidden Traps That Will Derail Your PER White Paper
This white paper is a companion piece to our popular webinar that uncovers what we have learned from our experience in writing Medical Device Regulation (MDR)-compliant Clinical Evaluation Reports (CERs), and how urgently applicable some of these key learnings are in preparing a robust Performance Evaluation Report (PER).
Hidden Traps That Will Derail Your CER White Paper
This white paper is a companion piece to our popular webinar where we share some of the biggest issues we have discovered when starting a Clinical Evaluation Report (CER) project, and how to anticipate and avoid project delays.
How to Assess Your CER for MDR-Readiness Part 2
This companion piece to our popular webinar discusses strategies for assessing key components of your CER like clinical data sources and risk-benefit analysis.
How to Assess Your CER for MDR-Readiness Part 1
This white paper outlines strategies to assess your CER including state of the art, safety and performance criteria, equivalence and systematic literature review.
Leveraging the MDR experience for IVDR: Tips for Successful Performance Evaluation and PMS/PMPF Processes [Free Webinar]
Have the IVDR Performance Evaluation and Post Market Surveillance requirements got you tied up in knots? Where do you start? What does the end product look like? We are joined by the VP of Regulatory, Quality, and Clinical from Nextern, a collaborative medical device company bringing unmatched core competence in medical device product design and development. Criterion Edge’s President Laurie Mitchell will lead a discussion of their experiences supporting clients through MDR and IVDR requirements.
Effective Corporate Scientific Communication: Strategies to Support your Corporate Narrative and Maximize the Real-World Impact of your Data [Free Webinar]
In this practical presentation, President Laurie Mitchell will: 1) discuss how an effective scientific communication plan is an important marketing tool for an organization, and 2) present five strategies to ensure your corporate objectives are supported and maximize the real-world impact of your data. Join us to learn how this applies to your organization and how to implement these strategies into your current processes.
Hidden Traps That Derail PER Preparedness: Lessons Learned from the MDR-Compliant CER Writing Experience [Free Webinar]
In this practical presentation, Criterion Edge uncovers what we have learned from our experience in writing MDR-compliant CERs, and how urgently applicable some of these key learnings are in preparing a robust Performance Evaluation Report (PER).
Hidden Traps That Can Derail Your CER: Answer These Critical Questions Before You Start Writing [Free Webinar]
As we all know, the MDR has significantly increased both the quality and quantity of inputs needed to complete a CER, needing more up-front planning than the reports have in the past. Based on our experiences with clients both large and small, our President, Laurie Mitchell, shares some of the biggest issues we have discovered when starting an MDR CER project. Laurie also reveals some of the most successful strategies in addressing these issues, up-front and early.
How to Assess Your CER for MDR Readiness, Part 2 [Free Webinar]
In this second installment of our 2-part webinar series, Criterion Edge shares practical presentation to help you assess your CER through the critical lens of a writer and identify possible gaps for mitigation before prior to submission to regulatory authorities.
Systematic Literature Review: How to Empower Data-Driven Decision Making [Free Webinar]
In this webinar, we share the process of systematic literature review, and discuss the tools and best practices for creating a methodologically-sound systematic literature review.
Experience and Scalability
Watch this video to learn how Criterion Edge is different from the rest.
5 Key Questions to Help Manage Your Budget
This infographic goes through 5 key questions to go through in order to control your budget.
Examining the Implications of the MDR on Data Management
Leading industry experts come together to discuss how the MDR affects data management within their respective units.
MedDev 2.7/1 Guideline: Equivalence and Risk/Benefit Profile
This report clarifies the modifications to the equivalence guidelines in MEDDEV 2.7/1 and Quality Management Systems (QMS) ISO 13485 standard to help develop strategies.
MedDev 2.7/1 Guideline: Qualifications of Evaluators and Scientific Validity
This gap analysis addresses key revisions to evaluator qualifications and scientific validity in the Clinical Evaluation (CE) MEDDEV guideline rev.4.
MedDev 2.7/1 Guideline: More Clinical Evaluations?
The changes to 2.7/1 rev. 4 suggest the need to submit more frequent CERs to regulatory authorities, however, strategies will be discussed for managing the increased requirements.
Data Mining: New Initiatives on Health Care Data that Manufacturers Should be Watching
Every time a healthcare provider makes a notation in the medical chart, a significant and valuable piece of data has been created. This paper discusses the implications of this.
10 Strategies to Build Efficiencies in your Regulatory Writing Process
This piece discusses 10 key strategies to building an efficient regulatory writing process.
State of the Art: Best Practices and Literature Review Using DistillerSR
In this paper, we discuss a prominent clarification on the MEDDEV 2.7.1 rev 4, establishing the “state of the art” section.
Q&A Follow-Up: How to Assess Your CER for MDR Readiness, Part 1 [Free Webinar]
The overwhelming turnout at the ‘How to Assess Your CER for MDR Readiness, Part 1’ prompted us to host a live Q+A session where President Laurie Mitchell exclusively answers all your questions.
Systematic Literature Review To Help Meet MDR Requirements [Free Webinar]
President Laurie Mitchell returns to continue sharing more about the importance of the systematic literature review.
State of the Art Literature Review for EU MDR Compliance: How To Get It Right [Free Webinar]
Establishing and defining state of the art for a medical device is no longer an isolated task – it supports the entire Clinical Evaluation Report (CER). Multiple sections of the MEDDEV 2.7/1 rev 4 compliant CER need to be supported by state of the art data, including safety and performance, risk management, and equivalence.
How to Assess Your CER for MDR Readiness, Part 1 [Free Webinar]
In this first installment of a 2-part webinar series, Criterion Edge will present strategies for assessing key components of your CER (or CER template) for possible misalignment with significant and applicable MDR requirements.
Intro to Adverse Event Reviews [Free Webinar]
In this webinar, President Laurie Mitchell discusses why safety reviews are essential in the entire life cycle of product development.
Advantages to Technologies Supporting Endpoint Adjudication [Free Webinar]
Kyoko Hattori from Criterion Edge returns to discuss best practices for managing the adjudication process in-house, and Brian Kelly from AG Mednet will share how the “JUDI” platform can simplify the management of adjudication.
Endpoint Adjudication by the Clinical Endpoints Committee (CEC) [Free Webinar]
In this webinar, learn about CECs, familiarization with regulatory guidance, decision factors leading to use of a CEC, and much more.
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
3rd Party Cookies
This website uses Google Tag Manager and Pardot's tracking features to collect information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages. Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.
Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!