Search Results

The Dukal AAMI Level 4 Open-Back Protective Gowns are intended to protect health care personnel and patients from the transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material. These gowns are not intended for use in the operating room.

The Dukal AAMI Level 4 Open-Back Protective Gown meets the barrier protection requirements of AAMI Level 4 per ANSI/A AMI PB70, Liquid Barrier Performance and Classification of Protective Apparel and Drapes Intended for Use in Health Care Facilities, but has an open back which is non-protective.

These gowns are single use, disposable medical devices provided non-sterile.

Dukal AAMI Level 4 Open-Back Protective Gowns are intended to protect health care personnel and patients from the transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material These gowns are not intended - for use in the operating room. The gowns are available on Regular and X-Large sizes.

Dukal AAMI Level 4 Open-Back Protective Gowns are made with laminate material (SMS nonwoven material with polyethylene film).

All gowns are blue, with neck removal feature, belt ties, and thumb hook cuff sleeves.

These gowns are single use, disposable devices, that are provided non-sterile.

The provided document is a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device: Dukal AAMI Level 4 Open-Back Protective Gown. This document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through non-clinical testing rather than clinical studies involving human patients or complex AI algorithms. Therefore, many of the requested categories related to clinical trials, multi-reader multi-case studies, and AI-specific ground truth are not applicable.

Here's the breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study information based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Sample Size: For the Liquid Barrier Performance Classification test (ASTM F1671), the testing was performed using 3 lots and 32 samples per lot in each critical zone area (body/sleeve and heat-sealed seams). For other tests, specific sample sizes are not explicitly stated within the provided text, but the results are reported as meeting the requirements.
• Data Provenance: The nature of these tests (material properties) suggests they were conducted in a laboratory setting. There is no information provided regarding the country of origin of the data or whether it was retrospective or prospective, as these terms are not typically applicable to physical product testing of this kind.

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

Not applicable. These are non-clinical, objective material property tests and do not involve expert interpretation or ground truth establishment by medical professionals. The "ground truth" is determined by the standardized test methods and their defined pass/fail criteria.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

Not applicable. Adjudication methods (like 2+1, 3+1) are used for dispute resolution or consensus building among human readers, typically in image interpretation or clinical diagnosis. These tests involve objective physical measurements against established standards.

5. If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study is relevant for evaluating the performance of AI-assisted diagnostic tools with human readers. The device in question is a protective gown, which is not an AI-powered diagnostic device.

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

No, a standalone algorithm performance study was not done. This device is not an algorithm or AI model.

7. The type of ground truth used

For this device, the "ground truth" is the objective, measurable performance against established industry standards (e.g., AAMI Level 4 requirements, ASTM, ISO, AATCC standards). There is no "expert consensus," "pathology," or "outcomes data" in the typical sense for a protective gown's material performance. The ground truth is embedded in the standardized test methods and their pass/fail criteria.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This device does not involve a training set as it is not an AI/machine learning model.

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

Not applicable, as there is no training set for this device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dukal Level 1 Pediatric Face Masks are intended to be worn by the patient/child to cover the nose and mouth to provide a barrier for the respiratory tract from microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material. Recommended ages are 4-12. The face mask is specifically for use with patients whose age or illness may prevent them from taking necessary precautions in situations where transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulates can occur. The face masks are recommended for use in a healthcare setting with appropriate adult supervision. The Dukal Level 1 Pediatric Face Masks are single use, disposable devices that are provided non-sterile.

Pediatric face masks are intended to be worn by the patient/child to cover the nose and mouth to provide a barrier for the respiratory tract from microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material. The mask is available in the following product sizes: Regular Size (14.5x9cm) and Extra Small Size (12.5x8cm). The Dukal Level 1 Pediatric Face Mask (both sizes) are composed of three layers of materials and pleated to form the mask. The inner layer is composed of Polypropylene (Spunbond), the middle layer is Polypropylene (Meltblown) filter material, and the outer layer is polypropylene (Spunbond). The masks (both sizes) are held in place on wearer with knitted polyester/spandex elastic ear loop and contain a malleable aluminum nosepiece strip. The masks (both sizes) have decorative patterns, printed with colored inks.

This document describes the performance testing for the Dukal Level 1 Pediatric Face Mask. The device is a medical face mask and the acceptance criteria and performance are based on established standards for such devices.

Here's the breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The device performance is compared to the requirements specified by various test standards, primarily ASTM F2100-19 Level 1 requirements for medical face masks.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dukal Sterile AAMI Level 3 Reinforced Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 3 Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 4 Surgical Gown, and Sterile AAMI Level 4 Splicing Surgical Gown are intended to be worn by operating room personnel during surgical procedures to protect both the surgical patient and the operating room personnel from transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material. Per ANSI/AAMI PB70:2012 Liquid barrier performance and classification of protective apparel and drapes intended for use in health care facilities, Dukal AAMI Level 3 Reinforced Surgical Gown and Sterile AAMI Level 3 Surgical Gown met the requirements for Level 3 classification; Dukal Sterile AAMI Level 4 Surgical Gown and Sterile AAMI Level 4 Splicing Surgical Gown met the requirements for Level 4 classification.

The Dukal Sterile AAM Level 3 Reinforced Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 3 Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 4 Surgical Gown, and Sterile AAMI Level 4 Splicing Surgical Gown are single use, disposable medical devices, and are provided sterile.

Surgical Gowns are intended to be worn by operating room personnel during surgical procedures to protect both the surgical patient and the operating room personnel from transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material. The Dukal Sterile AAMI Level 3 Reinforced Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 3 Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 4 Surgical Gown, and Sterile AAMI Level 4 Splicing Surgical Gown are single use, disposable medical devices, and are provided sterile. Each type of Surgical Gown is available in six product sizes: M, L, XL, XXL, XXXL and XXXL-XL.

Dukal Sterile AAMI Level 3 Reinforced Surgical Gown and Sterile AAMI Level 3 Surgical Gown are made with SMS nonwoven material. The Dukal Sterile AAMI Level 4 Surgical Gown and Sterile AAMI Level 4 Splicing Surgical Gown are made with BVB material.

Only the Dukal Sterile AAMI Level 3 Reinforced Surgical Gown is reinforced with laminated material. Dukal Sterile AAMI Level 3 Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 4 Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 4 Splicing Surgical Gown are non-reinforced.

Only the Sterile AAMI Level 4 Splicing Surgical gown has a different material for the back of the gown (SMS nonwoven fabric). The back of the gown for the Sterile AAMI Level 4 Surgical gown is made with BVB material.

All gowns are blue, with hook and loop closures, belt ties, and knitted cuff sleeves.

This document describes a 510(k) premarket notification for Dukal Sterile AAMI Level 3 Reinforced Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 3 Surgical Gown, Sterile AAMI Level 4 Surgical Gown, and Sterile AAMI Level 4 Splicing Surgical Gown. The submission establishes substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K192290: Xuchang Zhengde Environstar Medical Products Co., Ltd SMS Standard Surgical Gown (level 3), SMS Surgical Gown with Reinforcement (level 3), BVB Surgical Gown (level 4), BVB Splicing Surgical Gown (level 4)).

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are generally "Same" as the predicate device or "Meets requirement" based on specific test standards. The reported device performance consistently meets these criteria.

AAMI Level 3 Surgical Gowns:

AAMI Level 4 Surgical Gowns:

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

The document does not explicitly state the sample sizes used for each specific test in the "Test Results of Subject Device" columns. However, it indicates that the tests conform to recognized standards (e.g., AATCC, ASTM, ISO). These standards typically specify minimum sample sizes for each test.

The data provenance is not explicitly stated in terms of country of origin or whether it's retrospective or prospective. It is assumed to be prospective testing conducted on the finished device to demonstrate compliance with the referenced standards.

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

This is a submission for a physical medical device (surgical gowns) and not an AI/software device. Therefore, the concept of "experts used to establish ground truth" (e.g., radiologists) in the context of diagnostic interpretation is not applicable here. The "ground truth" is established by direct measurement and testing against established physical and chemical standards.

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

Not applicable. This is not a study involving human interpretation or adjudication of diagnostic findings. The tests are based on objective physical and chemical measurements following established laboratory protocols.

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

Not applicable. An MRMC study is relevant for AI-powered diagnostic devices, which is not the case for surgical gowns.

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

Not applicable. This is not an AI/algorithm-based device.

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

The ground truth is based on recognized consensus standards for physical and chemical testing of surgical apparel, such as:

• ANSI/AAMI PB70:2012 Liquid Barrier Performance and Classification of Protective Apparel and Drapes
• 16 CFR Part 1610 Standard for the Flammability of Clothing Textiles
• AATCC 127:2017 Water Resistance: Hydrostatic Pressure Test
• AATCC 42:2017 Water Resistance: Impact Penetration Test
• ASTM F1671/F1671M-13 Standard Test Method for Resistance to Materials Used in Protective Clothing to Penetration by Blood-Borne Pathogens
• ISO 9073-10:2003 Textiles-Test Methods for Nonwovens-Part 10: Lint and Other Particles Generation in the Dry State
• ASTM D1683/D1683M-17:2017/(R)2018 Standard Test Method for Failure in Sewn Seams of Woven Fabrics
• ASTM D5733-99 Standard Test Method for Tearing Strength of Nonwoven Fabrics by the Trapezoid Procedure
• ASTM D5034-09:2017 Standard Test Method for Breaking Strength and Elongation of Textile Fabrics (Grab Test)
• ASTM D737-18:2018 Standard Test Method for Air Permeability of Textile Fabrics
• ASTM F88/F88M-15 Standard Test Method for Seal Strength of Flexible Barrier Materials
• ASTM F1929-15 Standard Test Method for Detecting Seal Leaks in Porous Medical Packaging by Dye Penetration
• ISO 10993-7:2008 Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices-Part 7:Ethylene Oxide Sterilization Residuals
• ISO 10993-5:2009 Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices-Part 5: Tests for in Vitro Cytotoxicity
• ISO 10993-10:2010 Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices-Part 10: Tests for Irritation and Skin Sensitization

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI device that requires a training set.

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

Not applicable. As this is not an AI/ML device, there is no training set or ground truth in that context.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dukal Corporation Level 3 Surgical Face Masks are intended to be worn by operating room personnel during surgical procedures to protect both the surgical patient and the operating room personnel from transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material.

Face Masks intended to protect health care patients and personnel from the transfer of microorganisms, body fluids and particulate material.

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for the Dukal Corporation Level 3 Surgical Face Masks. This type of document is for regulatory clearance of medical devices, demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, rather than proving that a device meets particular acceptance criteria through a clinical study. Therefore, much of the requested information about a study is not available in this text, as it describes performance testing results for a medical device (surgical face masks).

However, I can extract the acceptance criteria (defined by ASTM F2100-19 Level 3 requirements for the subject device and ASTM F2100-11 Level 3 requirements for the predicate) and the reported device performance.

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Device: Dukal Corporation Level 3 Surgical Face Masks with Ear Loop and Level 3 Surgical Face Masks with Tie On

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dukal Corporation Level 2 Surgical Mask with Ear Loops, Dukal Corporation Level 2 Surgical Mask with Ear Loops and Face Shield, and Dukal Corporation Level 2 Surgical Mask with Adjustable Tie Ons are intended to be worn to protect both the patient and healthcare personnel from transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material. These face masks are intended for use in infection control practices to reduce the potential exposure to blood and body fluids. This is a single-use, disposable device, provided non-sterile.

Face Masks intended to be worn to protect both the patient and healthcare personnel from transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material.

The provided text does not describe an AI/ML device but rather a surgical mask (Dukal Corporation Level 2 Surgical Mask with Ear Loops, Dukal Corporation Level 2 Surgical Mask with Ear Loops and Face Shield, and Dukal Corporation Level 2 Surgical Mask with Adjustable Tie Ons). Therefore, the information requested for AI/ML devices, such as sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, and training set details, is not applicable and cannot be extracted.

However, I can provide the acceptance criteria and the reported device performance for the surgical masks based on the provided text, as these are relevant to non-AI/ML medical devices.

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance (for the Surgical Mask):

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dukal Sterile Lubricating Jelly is a medical device intended for medical purposes, to lubricate body orifices to facilitate entry of diagnostic devices when a sterile field is required.

The Dukal Sterile Lubricating Jelly is a clear, greaseless, water soluble jelly.

The provided document, K113689, describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the Dukal Sterile Lubricating Jelly. This is not for a software or AI-powered medical device, but rather a physical medical device. Therefore, many of the requested criteria (like sample size for test set, number of experts for ground truth, MRMC studies, standalone algorithm performance, training set size, etc.) are not applicable in this context, as they relate to studies of diagnostic accuracy or performance of AI/software in interpreting data.

However, I can extract information related to the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets those criteria, aligning with the information that is present in the 510(k) submission for a non-AI device.

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance for Dukal Sterile Lubricating Jelly

The submission for the Dukal Sterile Lubricating Jelly demonstrates substantial equivalence to a predicate device (Dynarex Sterile Lubricating Jelly, K092488) based on comparable technological characteristics, intended use, and safety/effectiveness profiles. The "acceptance criteria" here are implicitly the criteria for demonstrating substantial equivalence, primarily through direct comparison of features and performance to a legally marketed predicate device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

For this non-AI medical device, the acceptance criteria are based on exhibiting similar technological characteristics and performance to the predicate device.

2. Sample Size for Test Set and Data Provenance

For physical medical devices undergoing a 510(k) submission based on substantial equivalence, the "test set" does not typically refer to a dataset of patient cases. Instead, it refers to samples of the device itself undergoing various physical, chemical, and biological tests.

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not specified in terms of number of units, but implies a sufficient number of samples of the Dukal Sterile Lubricating Jelly were used for the listed biocompatibility and sterilization validation tests.
• Data Provenance: The data arises from internal testing performed on the Dukal Sterile Lubricating Jelly and comparison to the publicly available characteristics of the predicate device (Dynarex Sterile Lubricating Jelly). It is retrospective in the sense that the predicate device's characteristics are already established.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications

This criterion is not applicable for this type of medical device submission. Ground truth, in the context of interpretation by experts, is relevant for diagnostic devices interpreting outputs like images or signals. For a lubricating jelly, "ground truth" is established through standardized laboratory testing (e.g., ISO standards for biocompatibility) and direct chemical/physical characterization, rather than expert interpretation of a test set.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This criterion is not applicable. Adjudication methods (like 2+1, 3+1) are for resolving discrepancies in expert interpretations of data in diagnostic studies. For a physical device, performance is evaluated against objective standards and test results.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was done

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. These types of studies are for evaluating the performance of diagnostic systems (often AI-assisted) and human readers in interpreting clinical cases. This device is a lubricating jelly, not a diagnostic system.

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

No, this is not applicable. This applies to software algorithms without human intervention. The Dukal Sterile Lubricating Jelly is a physical product directly applied by a human user as part of a medical procedure.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" for this device's performance relies on:

• Objective Laboratory Testing: Adherence to established standards for biocompatibility (ISO 10993 series for In-Vitro Cytotoxicity, Implantation, Irritation & Hypersensitivity, Systemic Toxicity).
• Sterilization Validation: Conformance to ISO/AAMI 11137 requirements for gamma irradiation sterilization with a specified Sterility Assurance Level (SAL).
• Chemical and Physical Characterization: Verification of ingredients and properties (e.g., water-soluble, non-staining, alcohol/fragrance-free) as listed on the label and compared to the predicate.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This criterion refers to the dataset used to train an AI model. This submission is for a physical medical device and does not involve AI or machine learning.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set was Established

Not applicable. As there is no training set for an AI model, this criterion does not apply.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dukal 20-001 - Fenestrated Dukal Surgical Drape, Blue, 18" x 26", with 3" Fenestration, and 20-002 - Dukal Surgical Drape, Blue, 18" x 26" is a device made of natural or synthetic materials intended to be used as a protective patient covering, such as to isolate a site of surgical incision from microbial and other contamination.

The Dukal 20-001 - Fenestrated Dukal Surgical Drape, Blue, 18" x 26", with 3" Fenestration, and 20-002 - Dukal Surgical Drape, Blue, 18" x 26" is a device made of natural or synthetic materials intended to be used as a protective patient covering, such as to isolate a site of surgical incision from microbial and other contamination.

I am sorry, but since this document is a letter from the FDA regarding the 510(k) premarket notification for a surgical drape, it does not contain the information requested in your prompt. Your prompt asks for details about the acceptance criteria and a study proving a device meets these criteria, typically associated with the performance of AI/Machine Learning medical devices.

This document is a regulatory approval letter for a physical product (a surgical drape), and therefore, the concepts of "test set," "ground truth," "MRMC study," "human readers," or "training set" are not applicable.

Could you please provide a document that describes the performance study of a device, likely an AI/ML-based medical device, if you would like me to answer those specific questions?

Ask a specific question about this device

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dukal medical / surgical masks are indicated as a protective nose and mouth covering for healthcare workers and patients involved in medical and surgical procedures. The masks are indicated in any procedure or situation where there is a risk of microorganism, body fluid and particulate aerosol transfer.

Dukal Surgical Masks are pleated 3 - ply masks. Inner and outer layers are made of either medical grade tissue or 100% spun-bond polypropylene. Middle layer is made of 100% melt blown polypropylene filter. Ear loops are made of soft latex free elastic loops. The nose piece for all Dukal Masks is a malleable aluminum wire. Masks with splash visors have an anti fog treated plastic shield attached to masks. All of the material used in the construction of the Dukal face masks are being used in currently marketed devices (see predicate information)

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for a non-sterile surgical mask (Dukal Surgical Face Mask, referenced as K070407). However, the information provided focuses primarily on regulatory aspects, device description, and intended use, rather than conducting a detailed study with specific acceptance criteria and performance data in the way a diagnostic AI device would.

Based on the provided text, here's a breakdown regarding acceptance criteria and study information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

For this surgical mask, the "acceptance criteria" are defined by the adherence to a recognized performance standard, specifically ASTM 2100-04. The document states, "Recognized Performance Standard: ASTM 2100-04 Refer to submission for applicable standards."

The document does not explicitly list the quantitative acceptance criteria defined within ASTM 2100-04 or the specific test results showing the device performing against these criteria in a table format within the provided excerpt. It simply refers to the standard as being part of the larger submission.

However, based on general knowledge of ASTM F2100 (which is the standard for Medical Face Mask Materials, often referred to as ASTM 2100-04 in older documents), the acceptance criteria typically cover:

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dukal medical / surgical masks are indicated as a protective nose and mouth covering for healthcare workers and patients involved in medical and surgical procedures. The masks are indicated in any procedure or situation where there is a risk of microorganism, body fluid and particulate aerosol transfer.

Dukal Surgical Masks are pleated 3 – ply masks. Inner and outer layers are made of either medical grade tissue or 100% spun-bond polypropylene. Middle layer is made of 100% melt blown polypropylene filter. Ear loops are made of soft latex free elastic loops. The nose piece for all Dukal Masks is a malleable aluminum wire. Masks with splash visors have an anti fog treated plastic shield attached to masks. All of the material used in the construction of the Dukal face masks are being used in currently marketed devices (see predicate information)

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the Dukal Surgical Mask, based on the provided 510(k) summary:

This device is a surgical mask, and the study described is a performance characteristic comparison against a predicate device and recognized standards, rather than a clinical study involving human readers or AI. Therefore, several sections of your request (MRMC study, standalone performance, training set details) are not applicable.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are implicitly defined by the performance of the predicate device and the specified ASTM standards. The reported device performance is compared directly to these.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Sample Size for Test Set:
  • For the Fluid Resistance Performance test (ASTM F1862-05), the sample size was 32 units tested for both the predicate device and the Dukal mask.
  • For other performance tests like Particulate Filtration Efficiency, Bacterial Filtration Efficiency, Differential Pressure, and Flammability, a specific sample size is not explicitly stated in the provided text, but it is implied that sufficient samples were tested to obtain the reported percentages and average values according to the specified ASTM standards.
• Data Provenance: Not specified, but implied to be from laboratory testing conducted by Dukal Corporation for their device and likely from the predicate device's 510(k) submission for its data. This is a retrospective comparison against listed predicate device performance and standards. The country of origin of the testing is not mentioned.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts

Not applicable. This study involves objective performance testing of a physical product (surgical mask) against defined material specifications and ASTM standards, not the interpretation of medical data by experts. The "ground truth" for each parameter is established by the results of the standardized test methods.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. As noted above, this involves objective physical testing, not expert interpretation requiring adjudication.

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

Not applicable. This is not an AI/software device and no MRMC study was performed.

6. If a Standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) Was Done

Not applicable. This is not an AI/software device. The device's performance is standalone in the sense that its physical properties are measured directly.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth for the performance characteristics is established by:

• Recognized Performance Standards: Specifically, ASTM F1862-05, ASTM2299, ASTM F2101-01, ASTM F2100-04, and MIL-M-36945C. These standards define the acceptable methodology and often performance benchmarks.
• Predicate Device Performance: The performance data of the legally marketed predicate device (A.R. Medicom K051291) serves as a benchmark for substantial equivalence.
• Raw Material Specifications: For the composition of the mask layers, ear loops, nose piece, and plastic shield.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI device that requires a training set.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Not applicable. No training set was used.

Ask a specific question about this device