Search Results

The intended use of the Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM MB-2401 is designed to provide muscle relaxation therapy by delivering heat and soothing massage to affected areas.

Additionally, the product provides topical radiant infrared heat for:

• Temporary relief of minor muscle and joint pain stiffness
• Temporary relief of minor joint pain associated with arthritis
• Temporary increase in local circulation where applied
• Relaxation of muscles

The aircell leg massager is designed to provide temporary relief of minor muscle aches and pains and a temporary increase in blood circulation to the treated areas. The aircell leg massager stimulates kneading and stroking of tissues by using an inflatable garment.

Not Found

The FDA 510(k) Clearance Letter for the Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager (CGM MB-2401) does not contain information regarding detailed acceptance criteria and a study that proves the device meets specific performance metrics beyond its stated indications for use.

The letter primarily focuses on the regulatory determination of substantial equivalence to predicate devices, allowing the manufacturer to market the device. It outlines the device's intended use and general regulatory requirements but does not include clinical study data, statistical performance metrics, or details about the validation process typically associated with detailed acceptance criteria of an AI/algorithm-driven device.

Therefore, the requested information cannot be extracted from the provided document.

Information NOT available in the provided document:

1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This information is not present. The letter does not specify quantitative performance metrics or acceptance thresholds.
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not provided. There is no mention of a test set, its size, or where any data used for validation (if any) originated.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable, as no test set or ground truth establishment process is described.
4. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable.
5. If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, and its effect size: Not applicable. The device is a physical therapy massager, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for which MRMC studies are typically performed.
6. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable, as this is a physical device, not an algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): Not applicable.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable, as this is not an AI/ML device requiring a training set in the conventional sense.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

The FDA 510(k) clearance process for a Multi-Function Physical Therapy Table (like the Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager) typically relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, often through engineering performance tests and adherence to recognized standards, rather than complex clinical effectiveness studies with explicit performance metrics like those for diagnostic AI tools. The provided document is a regulatory clearance letter, not a full submission document that would detail all validation studies.

Ask a specific question about this device

The intended use of the Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM MB-2301 & CGM MB-2302 is to provide muscle relaxation therapy by delivering heat and soothing massage.

Additionally, the product provides topical radiant infrared heat for:

• Temporary relief of minor muscle and joint pain stiffness
• Temporary relief of minor joint pain associated with arthritis
• Temporary increase in local circulation where applied
• Relaxation of muscles

The Air Cell Massager is indicated for the temporary relief of minor muscle aches and for temporary increase in blood circulation to the treated areas. The Air Cell Massager stimulates kneading and stroking of tissues by using an inflatable garment.

Not Found

I am sorry, but the provided text is a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for a medical device (Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager). This type of document does not contain any information about acceptance criteria, device performance studies, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, or expert qualifications.

The letter is primarily concerned with:

• Confirming that the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices.
• Outlining the regulatory requirements the manufacturer must adhere to (e.g., registration, labeling, quality system regulations).
• Providing contact information for regulatory inquiries.
• Stating the intended use of the device.

Therefore, I cannot extract the information you requested regarding acceptance criteria and study details from the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device

The intended use of the Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM-MB-1902 is to provide muscle relaxation therapy by delivering heat and soothing massage. Additionally, the product provides topical radiant infrared heat for:

• Temporary relief of minor muscle and joint pain stiffness
• Temporary relief of minor joint pain associated with arthritis
• Temporary increase in local circulation where applied
• Relaxation of muscles

Not Found

I am sorry, but the provided text from the FDA 510(k) clearance letter for the "Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager (CGM-MB-1902)" does not contain any information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets those criteria, especially in the context of AI/ML performance.

The letter is a standard FDA clearance document that states the device has been determined to be substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices. It discusses:

• The device name and regulation details.
• General controls provisions (registration, listing, GMP, labeling, etc.).
• Applicable regulations (QS regulation, UDI Rule).
• Contact information for FDA.
• The "Indications for Use" for the device, which are limited to providing muscle relaxation therapy, temporary relief of minor muscle and joint pain/stiffness, temporary relief of minor joint pain associated with arthritis, temporary increase in local circulation, and relaxation of muscles.

There is no mention of:

• Any AI/ML component in the device.
• Specific performance metrics or acceptance criteria for such a component.
• Any study data (sample sizes, expert qualifications, ground truth, MRMC studies, standalone performance) related to an AI/ML algorithm.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request to describe the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them, as the provided document does not contain this information. The device, as described, is a physical therapy device and not an AI/ML-driven diagnostic or therapeutic tool for which such detailed performance studies would be typically required for clearance.

Ask a specific question about this device

The intended use of the Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM MB-1701 & CGM MB-1702 is to provide muscle relaxation therapy by delivering heat and soothing massage. Additionally, the product provides topical radiant infrared heat for:
-Temporary relief of minor muscle and joint pain stiffness
-Temporary relief of minor joint pain associated with arthritis
-Temporary increase in local circulation where applied

• Relaxation of muscles
  The Air Cell Massager (only CGM MB-1701) is indicated for the temporary relief of minor muscle aches and pains and for temporary increase in blood circulation to the treated areas. The Air Cell Massager stimulates kneading of tissues by using an inflatable garment.

The Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager with Air Cell Massager is an updated version of the predicate device with an addition of a leg massaging feature. This feature utilizes an "air compression transfer," and its principle is as follows: Air Cell Massager consists of an air pump, air pressure sensor, and sleeves working together as one unit. The air pump is connected to the dedicated sleeves via a series of hoses; each sleeve has 4 compression chambers. The compression massage direction is from foot to thigh. By inflating the air chambers sequentially and then deflating as one cycle, the pressure can be adjusted to avoid any discomfort to the patient. The sleeve works under the action of sensor and microprocessor. Software controls the timing and pressure cognized to the sensor, cycling airflow into and out of sleeves to compress body.

The provided text is related to a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device (Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM MB-1701 & CGM MB-1702). It discusses the device's indications for use, description, and a comparison to predicate and reference devices to demonstrate substantial equivalence.

However, the document does not contain information about acceptance criteria, a specific study proving the device meets those criteria, sample sizes for test or training sets, data provenance, expert ground truth establishment, adjudication methods, or MRMC studies. The document specifically states "The subject device has undergone safety and performance tests, and the results conformed with the test requests," and lists several non-clinical tests (Skin Temperature Study, Usability Study, EMC and electrical safety testing, software validation, and Biocompatibility studies). These are general tests demonstrating safety and compatibility, not a study designed to evaluate performance against specific clinical acceptance criteria as typically seen for AI/ML devices.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information from the given text. The text does not detail a study proving the device meets specific performance acceptance criteria for clinical efficacy or accuracy in the way the prompt implies (e.g., for an AI/ML algorithm). The listed tests primarily focus on electrical safety, EMC, biocompatibility, software functionality, and user manual usability, which are safety and basic functional performance aspects, not clinical performance against acceptance criteria.

Ask a specific question about this device

The intended use of the Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM-MB-1701 & CGM-MB-1702 is to provide muscle relaxation therapy by delivering heat and soothing massage. Additionally, the product provides topical radiant infrared heat for:

• Temporary relief of minor muscle and joint pain stiffness
• Temporary relief of minor joint pain associated with arthritis
• Temporary increase in local circulation where applied
• Relaxation of muscles

The Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager which offers two models, CGM MB-1701 & CGM MB-1702 is an electrically powered, motorized, multi-functional physical therapy table intended to use for temporary relief of muscle/joint pain and stiffness by applying massage pressure from up and down movement of the internal motor, and heat from the internal and external projectors.

The main components of the subject device are a main table mat, a supporting mat, a 3-Sphere projector, an abdominal vibration projector, and a remote control. The main table has an internal projector which includes an up/down movement motor for pressure effect with ceramic balls as a medium for thermal massage effect. The internal projector is located in the center of the mat which is mainly for spine and up/down and vertically along the spinal line. The main table mat has a heating pad for thermal effect.

The 3-sphere projector is an optional accessory which the user can put anywhere needed additionally such as neck and armpit, and has 3 balls for thermal effect. The abdominal vibration projector is also an optional accessory mainly for abdominal area and offers vibration and thermal effect.

The only difference between the model CGM MB-1701 and the CGM MB-1702 is that the CGM MB-1701 has an air massage module for calf on the supporting mat. The supporting mat of the both models has a heating pad.

This document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification from Ceragem Co, Ltd. to the FDA for their Automatic Thermal Massagers, Models CGM-MB-1701 & CGM-MB-1702. The purpose of this notification is to demonstrate that their new devices are substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device (Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM MB-1101, K140592) and thus do not require a Premarket Approval (PMA).

The information provided focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence based on indications for use, principle of operation, technological characteristics, and performance specifications. However, the document does not describe a study that involves an AI/algorithm to meet acceptance criteria in the way envisioned by your request.

Specifically, the "Performance Tests (Non-clinical)" section (Page 6) details several tests conducted, but none of them are related to AI/algorithm performance. The tests are:

• Skin temperature study: To verify heat delivery.
• Usability study: To validate lay user operation with the manual.
• EMC and electrical safety testing: To meet standards like ANSI AAMI ES60601-1, IEC 60601-1-2, etc.
• Biocompatibility tests: Cytotoxicity, skin irritation, and sensitization for new materials.
• Firmware validation tests: To verify the software works as intended.

The "firmware validation tests" are the closest to "algorithm" but they are for the device's operational firmware, not an AI or diagnostic algorithm assisting human readers as your prompt implies. The acceptance criteria for these tests are not detailed beyond "the test results of all the tests supported that it is substantially equivalent to the predicate device."

Therefore, I cannot provide the detailed information requested regarding acceptance criteria and a study proving an AI/algorithm meets those criteria because the provided text does not contain such a study. The document is for a physical medical device (thermal massager) and its assessment for market clearance, not an AI-powered diagnostic or assistive tool.

To answer your specific points, based on the provided text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: Not provided in the context of an AI/algorithm. The document discusses "performance specifications" for the physical device, such as temperature range, intensity levels (1-9 vs 1-6), and massage modes (more options in the subject device), and states that a skin temperature study was performed to maintain 40-45°C. This is not for an AI.
2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable for an AI/algorithm study. Sample sizes for the non-clinical performance tests (e.g., skin temperature, usability) are not specified.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable. Ground truth as typically defined for AI/diagnostic studies (e.g., expert reads, pathology reports) is not mentioned.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable.
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: No, this type of study was not done as the device is a physical massager, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): Not applicable in the context of an AI/algorithm. For the device, the "ground truth" for its performance seems to be physical measurements (e.g., skin temperature, electrical safety parameters) and comparison to the predicate device's established performance ranges.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

In summary, the provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter and its associated summary pertain to a physical therapeutic device (a thermal massager) and its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. It evaluates the fundamental safety and functional performance of the hardware, not an AI component. Therefore, the questions related to AI/algorithm performance and study design cannot be answered from this document.

Ask a specific question about this device

The intended use of the Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM-MB-1901 is to provide muscle relaxation therapy by delivering heat and soothing massage. Additionally, the product provides topical radiant infrared heat for:

• Temporary relief of minor muscle and joint pain stiffness
• Temporary relief of minor joint pain associated with arthritis
• Temporary increase in local circulation where applied
• Relaxation of muscles

The Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM-MB-1901 is an electrically powered, motorized, multi-functional physical therapy table intended to use for temporary relief of muscle/joint pain and stiffness by applying massage pressure from the vertical and horizontal movements, and heat from the internal and external projectors. The main components of the subject device are a main mat, a supporting mat, a 3-Sphere projector, an abdominal vibration projector, and a remote control. The main mat has an internal projector which includes an up/down movement motor for pressure effect with ceramic balls as a medium for thermal massage effect. The internal projector is located in the center of the mat which is mainly for spine and moves up and down as well as vertically. The main mat also has a heating pad. The supporting mat which is mainly for the legs have heating pad only. The 3-sphere projector is an optional accessory which the user can put anywhere needed additionally such as neck and armpit, and it has 3 balls for thermal effect. The abdominal vibration projector is also an optional accessory mainly for abdominal area and offers vibration and thermal effect.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the Ceragem Automatic Thermal Massager, Model CGM-MB-1901. This type of document is for medical devices that are deemed substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device. It focuses on demonstrating that the new device is as safe and effective as the predicate, rather than proving efficacy from scratch with extensive clinical trials like a PMA would require.

Therefore, the information regarding acceptance criteria and studies proving the device meets those criteria in the context of efficacy, particularly for AI/Machine Learning devices, is not present in this document. This document details engineering and safety/performance testing relevant to mechanical and thermal devices, not AI performance. Specifically:

• Acceptance Criteria for AI/ML Performance: Not applicable/not defined as this isn't an AI/ML device.
• Study Proving Device Meets Acceptance Criteria: The studies described ("skin temperature study," "usability study," "EMC and electrical safety testing," "cytotoxicity test," "skin irritation & sensitization tests," and "firmware validation tests") are all related to the physical, electrical, and material safety and performance of a thermal massager, not the accuracy or performance of an AI algorithm.

Let's break down what is available in the document related to testing, even though it doesn't fit the typical "acceptance criteria for an AI device" framework:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (as inferred for a thermal massager):

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

• The document does not specify sample sizes for these performance and safety tests (e.g., number of subjects in the skin temperature or usability study, number of material samples for biocompatibility).
• Data Provenance: Not specified (e.g., country of origin). The studies appear to be non-clinical (laboratory/in-house testing) with a potential small human component for skin temperature and usability. They are not referred to as retrospective or prospective clinical studies in the typical sense.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

• Not applicable/not specified. The studies described are engineering, safety, and basic human factor (usability) tests, not diagnostic accuracy studies requiring expert readers to establish ground truth.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:

• Not applicable. This is not a study requiring reader adjudication for diagnostic accuracy.

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:

• No, an MRMC study was not done. This device is not an AI/ML diagnostic or assistive device.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:

• No, this is not an AI/ML device. "Standalone performance" is not relevant here.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):

• Ground truth in the typical AI/ML sense (e.g., confirmed disease status) is not relevant. The "ground truth" for the tests performed would be:
  • Skin Temperature: Measured temperature readings.
  • Usability: Observation of user interaction and completion of tasks using the manual.
  • Electrical Safety/EMC: Compliance with standard thresholds and test procedures.
  • Biocompatibility: Laboratory results showing absence of toxic or irritating reactions.
  • Firmware: Expected functional outputs/behaviors.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Not applicable. This device is not an AI/ML device that requires a training set.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

• Not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device

The intended use of the CERAGEM-C Thermal Massager is to provide muscle relaxation therapy by delivering heat and soothing massage. Additionally, the Ceragem-C Thermal Massager provides radiant infrared heat for,
temporary relief of minor muscle and joint pain, and stiffness
the temporary relief of minor joint pain associated with arthritis
the temporary increase in local circulation where applied
relaxation of muscles

The CERAGEM-C Thermal Massager is an electrically powered motorized multi-functional physical therapy table. Its intended use is to provide muscle relaxation therapy by delivering heat and soothing The massage function is delivered by massage rollers mounted on an independent carriage massage. underneath a pad on the table torso section. The heat function is delivered by two components (1) heated jade massage rollers mounted together on the moving carriage and (2) heated Epoxy Carbon Panels. In both cases, the radiant infrared heat is emitted. Together, the massage action and heated pressure points apply light pressure as well as radiant infrared heat to the user.

The Ceragem-C Thermal Massager is not a device that would require AI performance metrics or a clinical study in the traditional sense, as it is a physical therapy device. The provided text is a 510(k) summary for a medical device that aims to demonstrate substantial equivalence to a predicate device, not to prove performance against specific acceptance criteria using a study with AI.

However, I can extract the "acceptance criteria" through the lens of regulatory compliance and the "study" as the comparison made to the predicate device.

Here's an interpretation based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance (in the context of regulatory equivalence):

Since this is a 510(k) submission for a non-AI physical therapy device, the following points are not applicable or do not have direct analogues in the provided text:

2. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable. No test set data in the conventional sense was used for performance evaluation of an AI algorithm. Equivalence was established via comparison to a predicate device and adherence to safety standards.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable. No "ground truth" for a test set was established in this context.
4. Adjudication method: Not applicable. There was no need for adjudication as it was not an AI performance study measuring agreement.
5. If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done: No, an MRMC study was not done. The device is a physical therapy massager, not an AI diagnostic tool.
6. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable. This is not an AI algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used: Not applicable in the context of an AI study. The "ground truth" in this regulatory context is the established safety and effectiveness of the predicate device and compliance with recognized safety standards.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable. This is not an AI algorithm.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable. This is not an AI algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device