(18 days)
The Barchens Digital Pacifier Thermometer is a non-sterile, re-usable clinical thermometer intended for the determination of oral body temperature in infants to children five years of age.
The Barchens Digital Pacifier Thermometer, is a battery-powered, liquid crystal display device using a thermometer embedded in the nipple. The patient contact portion is composed of medical silicone rubber. The body is of ABS plastic . This device is reusable and no components are disposable. This device is not intended for use with other sheaths or devices.
Please note that the provided text is a 510(k) summary and not a full study report. Therefore, specific details about acceptance criteria, detailed study methodology, and statistical power may not be explicitly stated to the level of a peer-reviewed publication. However, I will extract all available information to answer your questions.
Here's a breakdown of the information based on the provided K983619 summary:
Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
The 510(k) summary for the Barchens Digital Pacifier Thermometer does not explicitly list quantitative acceptance criteria in a table format. However, the summary implies that the device is substantially equivalent to predicate devices, which means its performance is expected to be comparable to established, legally marketed pacifier thermometers.
The document states that the Barchens Digital Pacifier Thermometer is a battery-powered, liquid crystal display device using a thermometer embedded in the nipple. The patient contact portion is composed of medical silicone rubber. The body is of ABS plastic. This device is reusable and no components are disposable. This describes the device's design and materials rather than its performance specifications.
The provided text does not include any specific performance data or numerical results from a study to prove the device meets acceptance criteria. The basis for substantial equivalence is typically demonstrating similar technological characteristics and intended use compared to predicate devices, and sometimes includes performance testing against recognized standards or predicate device performance. However, such explicit data is absent in this summary.
Therefore, I cannot populate a table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance from the provided text.
Study Details (Based on available information in the K983619 summary):
-
Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):
- The provided 510(k) summary does not mention a specific sample size for a test set used to evaluate the device's performance.
- It also does not specify the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective). 510(k) summaries often rely on equivalence to predicate devices and adherence to relevant standards rather than detailed clinical study data for simple devices like a thermometer.
-
Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g., radiologist with 10 years of experience):
- The 510(k) summary does not provide information on the number or qualifications of experts used to establish a ground truth for any test set. This type of detailed clinical validation information is typically not included in a brief 510(k) summary for a straightforward device like a thermometer, especially from this era.
-
Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
- The summary does not describe any adjudication method used for a test set.
-
If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance:
- No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This device is a simple digital pacifier thermometer, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool. Therefore, the concept of "human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance" is not applicable.
-
If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
- Not applicable. This device is a physical thermometer, not an algorithm. Its "performance" is its ability to accurately measure temperature, which is inherently a standalone function for the device itself.
-
The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):
- The summary does not specify the type of ground truth used for performance evaluation. For thermometers, ground truth typically refers to a reference temperature measured by a highly accurate and calibrated device. This is usually part of a technical performance study, not explicitly detailed in the 510(k) summary.
-
The sample size for the training set:
- Not applicable. This device is a digital thermometer, not a machine learning model, so there is no concept of a "training set."
-
How the ground truth for the training set was established:
- Not applicable. As there is no training set for this device, a method for establishing its ground truth is not relevant.
In summary, the provided K983619 document is a 510(k) summary focused on establishing substantial equivalence for a medical device (a digital pacifier thermometer). It mainly describes the device and lists predicate devices. It does not contain the detailed study results, acceptance criteria, or methodological specifics that would be present in a comprehensive clinical or performance study report.
§ 880.2910 Clinical electronic thermometer.
(a)
Identification. A clinical electronic thermometer is a device used to measure the body temperature of a patient by means of a transducer coupled with an electronic signal amplification, conditioning, and display unit. The transducer may be in a detachable probe with or without a disposable cover.(b)
Classification. Class II (performance standards). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in part 807, subpart E of this chapter, subject to the limitations in § 880.9 and the following conditions for exemption:(1) Device is not a clinical thermometer with telethermographic functions;
(2) Device is not a clinical thermometer with continuous temperature measurement functions; and
(3) Appropriate analysis and testing (such as that outlined in the currently FDA-recognized editions, as appropriate, of ISO 80601-2-56, “Medical electrical equipment—Part 2-56: Particular requirements for basic safety and essential performance of clinical thermometers for body temperature measurement,” or ASTM E1965, “Standard Specification for Infrared Thermometers for Intermittent Determination of Patient Temperature,” or ASTM E1112, “Standard Specification for Electronic Thermometer for Intermittent Determination of Patient Temperature,” or ASTM E1104, “Standard Specification for Clinical Thermometer Probe Covers and Sheaths”) must validate specifications and performance of the device.