Search Results

The FROZEN C, hyperbaric CO2 cryotherapy device, is for use when cold therapy is indicated for the temporary reduction of pain, swelling, inflammation, and hematoma from minor surgical procedures, minor sprains or other minor sports injuries, and as an adjunct to rehabilitative treatment (e.g., intermittent cold with stretch).

The FROZEN C Cryotherapy Device uses a compressed medical-grade liquid carbon dioxide as cryogen to deliver a topical refrigerant. Using the natural expansion of liquid CO2, it creates a cold spray of microcrystals delivered under pressure. The FROZEN C Cryotherapy Device consists of a cylindrical grip hand-piece, touchscreen console for operation and display, infrared temperature sensor, and a cylinder of compressed medical-grade carbon dioxide gas (sold separately). The touchscreen provides continuous monitoring by displaying the measured skin temperature, treatment duration by timer set, and residual volume of CO2 gas. The user applies the CO2 spray to the treatment site for 30-60 seconds at a distance of 7cm through a gradual circular motion of handpiece. Rapid cooling (thermal shock) occurs when the spray sublimates (passes directly from solid (ice) phase to gas phase) as it contacts the skin.

The contact point where the two laser pointers meet is designed to guide the appropriate distance from the skin surface where the skin temperature is measured. If the laser pointer is not required by use environment, it is easy to deactivate by using on/off button in the touch screen. The LED on the hand-piece flickers when the measured temperature drops below 5℃ and the device automatically shut down when the measured temperature stays below 0℃ for 1 seconds.

The provided text describes the FROZEN C, a hyperbaric CO2 cryotherapy device. This device is intended for cold therapy to temporarily reduce pain, swelling, inflammation, and hematoma from minor surgical procedures, minor sprains, or other minor sports injuries, and as an adjunct to rehabilitative treatment.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and supporting studies based on the provided document:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:

   Acceptance Criterion	Reported Device Performance
   Temperature Accuracy	Difference between LCD temperature and actual skin surface temperature within ±2ºC.
   Time to Arrive at Intended Temperature	The temperature of the treatment area on skin dropped to 2 ~ 4℃ within 30s.
   Electrical Safety	Complies with AAMI ANSI ES 60601-1:2005/(R) 2012 and A1:2012 (Medical electrical equipment - Part 1: General requirements for basic safety and essential performance).
   Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC)	Complies with IEC 60601-1-2:2014 (Ed.4) (Medical Electrical Equipment - Part 1-2: General Requirements for Basic Safety and Essential Performance - Collateral Standard: Electromagnetic Compatibility).
   Software Validation	Software verification testing conducted as recommended in IEC 62304:2006 and FDA's Guidance Document "Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices."

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):
   The document does not provide information on a specific test set sample size or data provenance for the performance bench testing (temperature accuracy, time to temperature). These tests appear to be conducted internally as part of product verification.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:
   The document does not mention the use of experts to establish a ground truth for the performance bench testing. These are objective engineering measurements.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
   The document does not describe an adjudication method. Adjudication is typically associated with studies involving subjective interpretation or clinical endpoints, which are not detailed here for the performance tests.

5. 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:
   The provided text describes a cryotherapy device, which is a physical therapeutic device, not an AI or medical imaging device that would involve "human readers" or "AI assistance." Therefore, no MRMC comparative effectiveness study was performed or mentioned in this context.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
   This question is not applicable to the FROZEN C device as it is a physical cryotherapy device, not an algorithm or software-only diagnostic tool. The device itself performs the cold therapy; there isn't an "algorithm only" performance that can be tested in this context.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc):
   For the performance bench testing, the "ground truth" would be objective measurements obtained using calibrated instruments for temperature and time. For regulatory compliance (electrical safety, EMC, software), the ground truth is adherence to the specified international standards. There is no mention of expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data being used as ground truth for these performance evaluations.

8. The sample size for the training set:
   The document does not mention a training set. As this is a physical medical device undergoing performance bench testing and not an AI/machine learning system, a separate "training set" in the conventional sense is not applicable.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
   As no training set is mentioned or relevant to the device type and testing described, this question is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device