Search Results

The Nova StatStrip Lactate Hospital Meter System is intended for in vitro diagnostic use by health care professionals for clinical and for point-of-care usage for the quantitative determination of Lactate (Lac) in fresh venous and arterial whole blood specimens. It is not for use on capillary blood specimens. It is intended to provide plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods. The Nova StatStrip Lactate Hospital Meter System is indicated for use in a clinical setting by healthcare professionals as an aid to evaluate the acid-base status of patients suspected of having lactic acidosis.

Nova StatStrip Lactate Test Strips are intended for use only with Nova StatStrip Lactate Hospital Meter for quantitative determination of lactate in fresh venous and arterial whole blood specimens. It is not for use on capillary blood specimens. The performance characteristics of the device for lactate measurements on capillary specimens have not been established. Nova StatStrip Lactate Test Strips are for testing outside the body (in vitro diagnostic use only).

Nova StatStrip Lactate Control Solutions are intended for use with the Nova StatStrip Family of Meters and Nova StatStrip Lactate Test Strips as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood lactate test results. There are 2 levels of controls. (Level 1 and Level 2).

Nova StatStrip Lactate Linearity Kit solutions are used to check the linearity of the Nova StatStrip Family of Meters. There are 4 levels of lactate linearity solutions: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4.

The Nova StatStrip Lactate Hospital Meter System consists of:

1. Nova StatStrip Lactate Hospital Meter
2. Nova StatStrip Lactate Test Strips
3. Nova StatStrip Lactate Control Solutions (Levels 1 and 2)
4. Nova StatStrip Lactate Linearity Solutions (Levels 1,2,3 and 4)
5. Meter Docking Station

The provided text does not contain specific acceptance criteria or detailed performance data from a study that would allow for a direct numerical comparison in a table. The document is a 510(k) summary and approval letter, stating that performance studies were conducted and the device was found substantially equivalent to predicate devices. However, it does not provide the raw performance data, acceptance thresholds, or detailed methodology of these studies.

Therefore, many of the requested fields cannot be filled with specific information from the provided document.

Here's an attempt to answer based on the available information, with clear indications where information is not provided:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not provided. The document mentions "Laboratory and clinical testing was performed" but does not specify the number of samples or patients included in these studies.
• Data Provenance: Not provided specific details. The studies were described as "Laboratory and clinical testing," implying data collected for the purpose of this submission. The country of origin is not specified, but the submitter is a U.S. company. It's likely prospective data collected for the purpose of the 510(k) submission, given the nature of performance studies for new devices, but this is an inference.

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

• Not provided. The document states "substantially equivalent to the current methods for blood lactate measurements" and "plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods," implying comparison to established methods or gold standards, but the process of establishing ground truth for the specific test set is not detailed.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

• Not provided. Given that the ground truth establishment method is not described, the adjudication method is also not mentioned.

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 a medical device for quantitative determination of lactate in whole blood, not an imaging or diagnostic AI device that involves human reader interpretation. Therefore, an MRMC study is not relevant to this type of device.

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

• The device itself is a standalone system (meter and test strips) that provides a quantitative lactate reading. The performance studies described would inherently be standalone, assessing the device's ability to measure lactate accurately. There isn't a separate "algorithm only" component beyond the device's inherent operation.

7. The type of ground truth used

• The ground truth would implicitly be reference laboratory methods for lactate measurement, as the device aims to provide "plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods" and demonstrate "substantial equivalence to the current methods for blood lactate measurements."

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable/Not provided. This device is a measurement system (meter and test strips), not a machine learning or AI-based diagnostic tool that typically involves a distinct "training set" for model development in the same way. Its performance is based on its electrochemical detection principle and manufacturing precision, not on being "trained" on a dataset. The performance studies mentioned are for validation or verification, not training.

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

• Not applicable/Not provided, as there isn't a "training set" in the context of this type of device.

Ask a specific question about this device

Nova Max Plus Glucose and β-Ketone Control Solutions are intended for use with the Nova Max Family of Monitors (Nova Max, Nova Max Plus, and Nova Max Link), BD Logic and Paradigm Link Monitors, Nova Max Glucose Test Strips, and Nova Max Plus Ketone Test Strips as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood Glucose and ß-Ketone test results. There are two levels of Nova Max Plus Glucose and ß-Ketone Control Solutions (Mid and High).

Nova Max Plus Glucose and ß-Ketone Control Solutions are for in vitro diagnostic use ONLY (for testing outside the body).

Nova Max Plus Glucose and β-Ketone Control Solutions are intended for use with the Nova Max Family of Monitors (Nova Max, Nova Max Plus, and Nova Max Link), BD Logic and Paradigm Link Morr yours, Nova Max Glucose Test Strips, and Nova Max Plus Ketone Test Strips as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood Glucose and fl-Ketone test results. There are two levels of Nova Max Plucose and B-Ketone Control Solutions (Mid and High).

Nova Max Plus Glucose and B-Ketone Control Solutions are for in vitro diagnostic use ONLY (for testing outside the body).

Here's an analysis of the provided text, focusing on the acceptance criteria and study information for the Nova Max Plus Glucose and β-Ketone Control Solutions.

The provided document describes a 510(k) submission for Nova Max Plus Glucose and β-Ketone Control Solutions, a Class I medical device (quality control material). As such, the information typically provided for more complex Class II or Class III devices regarding clinical trials, extensive performance metrics, and human reader studies is not applicable or present in this type of submission for a control solution.

The acceptance criteria here refer to the product demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices. The study conducted primarily focuses on bench testing to support this claim, rather than clinical efficacy or diagnostic accuracy in patients.

Here's a breakdown of the requested information based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Given the nature of a quality control solution and a 510(k) submission for a Class I device, "acceptance criteria" here relate to demonstrating that the new control solutions perform comparably to previously cleared predicate device components and are safe and effective for their intended use. The performance is assessed through laboratory studies.

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

• Sample Size: The document does not specify a numerical sample size for the "test set." It broadly refers to "stability studies" and "averages in equivalency studies" being performed in the laboratory. For a control solution, the "test set" would refer to the batches of control solution produced and tested, as well as the number of measurements taken. This detail is not provided.
• Data Provenance: The studies were conducted "in the laboratory." Given the submitter's address (Waltham, MA, U.S.A.) and the context of a U.S. FDA 510(k) submission, the data is presumably derived from retrospective internal laboratory testing conducted by Nova Biomedical Corporation in the U.S.

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

• Number of Experts & Qualifications: This category is not applicable in the traditional sense for this device. For quality control solutions, "ground truth" is typically established by certified reference materials, analytical chemistry methods, or the manufacturing specifications and target values for the control. The document refers to the proposed solutions being for "in vitro diagnostic use ONLY." The "averages in equivalency studies" would likely compare the control solutions' measured values to these pre-defined target values or to the performance of predicate controls, as determined by laboratory experts, not clinical experts for diagnostic accuracy. No specific number or qualifications of experts for "ground truth" are mentioned.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: This concept is generally not applicable for a quality control solution. Adjudication methods (like 2+1 or 3+1) are used for resolving discrepancies in expert interpretations (e.g., radiologists reading images). Here, "performance studies" would involve comparing quantitative measurements against established norms or predicate device performance, which is a direct measurement and comparison rather than a subjective 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

• MRMC Study: No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study (comparing human readers with and without AI assistance) is relevant for diagnostic imaging or interpretation devices, particularly those involving AI. The device in question is a quality control solution, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool.

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

• Standalone Performance: This concept is not applicable to this device. A standalone (algorithm-only) performance is relevant for AI or automated diagnostic algorithms. The Nova Max Plus Glucose and β-Ketone Control Solutions are chemical solutions used to verify the accuracy of a monitor system; they do not have an "algorithm-only" performance in the way an AI diagnostic tool would. Their performance is inherent in their chemical composition and stability when measured by the intended monitor.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Type of Ground Truth: The ground-truth for quality control solutions is typically based on certified reference values, analytical standards, or established manufacturing targets for the glucose and β-ketone concentrations. The document implies that the device's performance, as measured by the monitor, is compared to these predetermined values or the performance of predicate controls, which represent the "ground truth" for what the control solution should measure. The text mentions "averages in equivalency studies," which would rely on such established truth.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Sample Size for Training Set: This is not applicable. This device is a quality control solution. It is manufactured, not "trained" in the context of machine learning or AI. Performance studies for control solutions involve batch testing, stability testing, and equivalency testing, but not a "training set" like an algorithm would require.

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

• How Ground Truth for Training Set was Established: This is not applicable as there is no "training set" for a quality control solution.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Nova Max Plus Blood Glucose and B-Ketone Monitoring System Monitor is intended to be used for the quantitative measurement of glucose or β-hydroxybutyrate (βketone) in fresh capillary whole blood. It is intended for use by people with diabetes mellitus in the home and by healthcare professionals in clinical settings as an aid to monitor the effectiveness of diabetes control. It is not intended for use in the diagnosis of or screening for diabetes mellitus and is not intended for use on neonates. The Nova Max Blood Glucose and B-Ketone Monitor is specifically indicated for the quantitative measurement of glucose in fresh capillary whole blood samples obtained from the fingertip, forearm and palm or B-hydroxybutvrate (8-ketone) in fresh capillary whole blood obtained from the fingertip only.

Nova Max Glucose Test Strips are intended for use only with the Nova Max Blood Glucose Monitor and the Nova Max Plus Blood Glucose and B-Ketone Monitor. The Glucose Monitor is calibrated to provide plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods. Nova Max Blood Glucose Test Strips are for testing outside the body (in vitro diagnostic use only).

The Nova Max Plus Ketone Test Strips are intended for use only on the Nova Max Plus Blood Glucose and B-Ketone Monitor.

Nova Max Glucose Control Solutions are intended for use with the Nova Max Blood Glucose Monitor, the Nova Max Plus Blood Glucose and B-Ketone Monitor and Nova Max Glucose Test Strips as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood glucose test results. There are three levels of controls, (Normal, Low and High).

Nova Max Plus Ketone Control Solutions are intended for use with Nova Max Plus Blood Glucose and B-Ketone Monitor and Nova Max B-Ketone Test Strips as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood ketone test results. There are three levels of controls, (Levels 1,2 and 3).

The Nova Max Plus Blood Glucose and B- Ketone Monitoring System consists of:

1. Nova Max Plus Blood Glucose and B-Ketone Monitor
2. Nova Max Glucose Test Strips
3. Nova Max Glucose Control Solutions (Normal, Low and High)
4. Nova Max Plus B-Ketone Test Strips
5. Nova Max Plus B-Ketone Control Solutions (Levels 1,2 and 3)

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the Nova Max Plus Blood Glucose and B-Ketone Monitoring System. Medical device 510(k) summaries, especially for in vitro diagnostic (IVD) devices like this one, typically don't include the detailed statistical acceptance criteria or the full study reports. Instead, they focus on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device.

However, I can extract the information that is present and highlight what is not explicitly stated in this type of document, but would typically be part of the full submission.

Here's an analysis based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state specific statistical acceptance criteria (e.g., % within +/- X mg/dL or % within +/- Y%). It states the general conclusion that the device "performs as intended" and "can produce results that are substantially equivalent to results obtained on the predicate devices."

For blood glucose meters, typical acceptance criteria often align with ISO 15197 for accuracy, which specifies standards like:

• ≥95% of results for glucose concentrations < 75 mg/dL differ by no more than ± 15 mg/dL from the reference measurement.
• ≥95% of results for glucose concentrations ≥ 75 mg/dL differ by no more than ± 20% from the reference measurement.

For β-ketone meters, similar accuracy criteria would be applied.

Since the specific criteria and detailed performance statistics (e.g., bias, precision, linearity over a range) are not provided in this summary, a table cannot be fully populated. The document only offers a high-level summary of the performance.

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

The document states: "The performance of the Nova Max Plus Blood Glucose and B-Ketone Monitoring System was studied in the laboratory and in clinical settings by healthcare professionals and lay users."

• Sample Size: Not explicitly stated. This would be detailed in the full performance study report within the 510(k) submission.
• Data Provenance: The studies were conducted in "the laboratory and in clinical settings" by "healthcare professionals and lay users." The country of origin is not specified, but Nova Biomedical Corporation is a U.S. company, suggesting the studies likely occurred in the U.S. The studies are implicit retrospective in the sense that they are evaluating a device that has already been developed and tested, but data collection would be prospective.

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

• Number of Experts/Reference Methods: Not explicitly stated. For IVD devices, "ground truth" (or reference method) for glucose and β-ketone is typically established using a high-precision laboratory analyzer (e.g., a YSI STAT PLUS Glucose & Lactate Analyzer for glucose, and a specific enzymatic method for β-ketone), rather than human experts reviewing images or clinical cases. These reference methods are themselves subject to strict quality control and calibration.
• Qualifications of Experts (if applicable): Not applicable in the traditional sense of human readers. The "experts" are the validated laboratory reference instruments and the trained personnel operating them according to standard protocols.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not applicable for this type of IVD device where ground truth is established by a reference laboratory method. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are typically used in imaging studies where human readers interpret data, and discrepancies need to be resolved.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

• No, an MRMC study was not done. This type of study assesses how AI assistance impacts human reader performance (e.g., radiologists reading X-rays). For a blood glucose and ketone monitoring system, the "reader" is essentially the device itself, and its performance is compared directly to a reference method, not to how it aids human interpretation of complex data.

6. Standalone Performance Study

• Yes, a standalone study was done. The entire "Performance Studies" section describes the evaluation of the device as a standalone system. The statement, "The studies demonstrated that lay users can obtain blood glucose and blood ß-Ketone results that are substantially equivalent to the current methods for blood glucose and blood ß-ketone measurements," directly refers to the device's independent performance.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• Reference Laboratory Methods: The ground truth for both glucose and β-ketonetest results would be established by highly accurate and precise laboratory reference instruments. The text mentions "current methods for blood glucose and blood ß-ketone measurements" and that the "Glucose Monitor is calibrated to provide plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods," strongly implying the use of such reference methods.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not Applicable/Not Explicitly Stated. For a traditional electrochemical blood glucose/ketone meter, there isn't a "training set" in the sense of machine learning algorithms that require vast amounts of data to learn patterns. The device's calibration curve and algorithms are developed through R&D and then validated. If any specific data were used for initial calibration curve development, that information is not provided here.

9. How Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

• Not Applicable/Not Explicitly Stated. As mentioned above, a "training set" with established ground truth is not typically relevant for this type of IVD device in the same way it is for AI/ML-driven devices. Device calibration and algorithm development would rely on controlled solutions and known concentrations, not a "ground truth" derived from patient samples with expert consensus.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Nova StatStrip Xpress Glucose Hospital Meter System is intended for in vitro diagnostic use by health care professionals and for Point-Of-Care usage for the quantitative measurement of glucose in capillary, venous, arterial, and neonate whole blood. It is indicated for use in a clinical setting by healthcare professionals as an aid to monitor the effectiveness of diabetes control.

Nova StatStrip Glucose Test Strips are intended for use only with Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meters for quantitative tests. The glucose meter is intended to quantitatively measure glucose (sugar) in whole blood. The Glucose Meter is calibrated to provide plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods. Nova StatStrip Glucose Test Strips are for testing outside the body (in vitro diagnostic use only).

Nova StatStrip Control Solutions is intended for use with Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meters and Nova StatStrip Glucose Test Strips as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood glucose test results. There are three levels of controls, (Level 2, and Level 3). These solutions will be offered for sale separately from the meter.

Nova StatStrip Glucose Linearity Kit solutions are used to check the linearity of Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter Systems. There are five levels of linearity solutions, (Level 2, Level 3, Level 4, and Level 5).

Not Found

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain information about acceptance criteria, device performance, or any detailed study results. The document is a 510(k) premarket notification letter from the FDA, along with an "Indications for Use" statement for the Nova StatStrip Xpress Glucose Hospital Meter.

It states that the FDA has reviewed the notification and determined the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices. It grants permission to market the device subject to general controls provisions of the Act.

Therefore, I cannot extract the specific information requested in your prompt regarding acceptance criteria, study details, sample sizes, expert qualifications, or ground truth establishment.

Ask a specific question about this device

Ask a specific question about this device

The Nova StatSensor Creatinine Hospital Meter is intended for in vitro diagnostic use by health care professionals and for Point-Of-Care usage for the quantitative measurement of creatinine in capillary, venous, and arterial whole blood. Creatinine measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of renal diseases and in monitoring renal dialysis. Not for use in neonates.

Nova StatSensor Creatinine Test Strips are intended for use only with the StatSensor Creatinine Hospital Meter for quantitative tests. The Nova StatSensor Creatinine Hospital Meter is intended to quantitatively measure creatinine in whole blood. The Creatinine Meter is calibrated to provide plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods. Nova StatSensor Creatinine Test Strips are for testing outside the body (in vitro diagnostic use only).

Nova StatSensor Creatinine Control Solutions are intended for use with the Nova StatSensor Creatinine Hospital Meter and Nova StatSensor Creatinine Test Strips as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood creatinine test results. There are three levels of controls, (Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3). These solutions will be offered for sale separately from the meter.

Nova StatSensor Creatinine Linearity Kit solutions are used to check the linearity of the Nova StatSensor Creatinine Hospital Meter System. There are five levels of Linearity Solutions, (Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, Level 4, and Level 5).

Not Found

Here's the analysis of the provided text regarding the Nova StatSensor Creatinine Hospital Meter, focusing on acceptance criteria and study details.

Important Note: The provided document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter and an Indications for Use statement. It does not contain the detailed study write-up that would typically include acceptance criteria and specific performance data. Therefore, I can only extract information that is explicitly stated or can be reasonably inferred from this type of regulatory document. Many of the requested details (sample sizes, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, training set details) are not present in this document.

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance Study Analysis

Based on the provided documents (FDA 510(k) clearance letter K070068 and Indications for Use), the Nova StatSensor Creatinine Hospital Meter is cleared for marketing as it has been deemed "substantially equivalent" to legally marketed predicate devices. This indicates that the device met the performance requirements necessary to demonstrate this substantial equivalence. However, the exact numerical acceptance criteria and the detailed study design proving those criteria are not present in these documents.

Missing Information: A typical detailed study report would include specific numerical targets for accuracy, precision, linearity, etc., and the results obtained against those targets. This document only confirms that such testing must have occurred to achieve 510(k) clearance.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

(Note: The "Acceptance Criteria" column is inferred from the general requirements for 510(k) cleared IVD devices and the nature of the predicate determination. The "Reported Device Performance" column states what the FDA's clearance implies, rather than specific numerical outcomes, as these are not provided.)

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

• Sample Size (Test Set): Not specified in the provided documents.
• Data Provenance: Not specified in the provided documents (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective). Safety and effectiveness data, likely gathered prospectively from clinical or laboratory studies in the US or other regions, would have been submitted to the FDA as part of the 510(k) application.

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

• Number of Experts: Not specified.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not specified.
  • For an in vitro diagnostic device measuring a chemical analyte like creatinine, the "ground truth" would typically be established by a reference method run by trained laboratory personnel in a CLIA-certified or equivalent laboratory, not necessarily "experts" in the sense of clinicians reviewing images, but rather highly skilled laboratory technicians and clinical chemists.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not specified. This is generally not applicable in the same way for quantitative chemical assays as it would be for subjective interpretations (e.g., radiology reads). The "ground truth" for a chemical assay is typically a quantitative result from a reference method.

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

• MRMC Study: No, an MRMC study is not applicable for this type of device. MRMC studies are used for devices that assist human interpretation of diagnostic images (e.g., radiologists interpreting X-rays or MRI scans). The Nova StatSensor Creatinine Hospital Meter is a quantitative assay device; it measures a biochemical marker directly, rather than assisting human readers in interpreting complex data.

• Effect Size of Human Readers Improvement: Not applicable, as no MRMC study was performed or is relevant for this device type.

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

• Standalone Performance Study: Yes, the performance testing for an in vitro diagnostic device like this is inherently "standalone" in the sense that the device measures creatinine directly without human interpretive intervention. The performance characteristics (accuracy, precision, linearity, etc.) are evaluated based on the device's output compared to a reference method. There isn't an "algorithm" in the same sense as an AI image interpretation tool, but rather the electrochemical detection and calculation within the meter.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Ground Truth Type:
  • Reference laboratory method: For quantitative diagnostic devices like this, the ground truth is established by a highly accurate and precise reference method for creatinine measurement (e.g., enzymatic or HPLC-based methods) performed in a clinical laboratory.
  • The document states, "The Creatinine Meter is calibrated to provide plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods," indicating that established laboratory methods serve as the standard for comparison.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Sample Size (Training Set): Not specified in the provided documents.
  • For a chemical assay device, "training set" doesn't apply in the same way as for machine learning algorithms. Instead, there would be internal development and verification studies using various samples to optimize the assay chemistry, electrode design, and instrument calibration before formal validation studies. The number of samples used in these internal studies is generally proprietary and not disclosed in regulatory summaries.

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

• Ground Truth for Training Set: Not specified.
  • Similar to the test set, during the development and calibration phases, the ground truth would have been established using reference laboratory methods for creatinine measurement on various samples to guide the optimization and calibration of the Nova StatSensor system.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter System is intended for in vitro diagnostic use by health care professionals and for Point-Of-Care usage for the quantitative measurement of glucose in capillary, venous, arterial, and neonate whole blood. It is indicated for use in a clinical setting by healthcare professionals as an aid to monitor the effectiveness of diabetes control.

Nova StatStrip Glucose Test Strips are intended for use only with the StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter for quantitative tests. The glucose meter is intended to quantitatively measure glucose (sugar) in whole blood. The Glucose Meter is calibrated to provide plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods. Nova StatStrip Glucose Test Strips are for testing outside the body (in vitro diagnostic use only).

Nova StatStrip Control Solutions is intended for use with the Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter and Nova StatStrip Glucose Test Strips as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood glucose test results. There are three levels of controls, (Level 2, and Level 3). These solutions will be offered for sale separately from the meter.

Nova StatStrip Glucose Linearity Kit solutions are used to check the linearity of the Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter System. There are five levels of linearity solutions. (Level 2, Level 3. Level 4. and Level 5).

Not Found

The provided text is a 510(k) premarket notification letter from the FDA to Nova Biomedical Corp. for their Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter System. It acknowledges the submission and states that the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices. The letter primarily focuses on regulatory approval and indications for use.

Crucially, this document does not contain the detailed acceptance criteria for device performance, nor does it describe specific studies proving that the device meets such criteria. It lists the "Indications for Use" for the device, but these are about how the device is intended to be used, not its performance metrics like accuracy, precision, or detection limits.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information about acceptance criteria, device performance, study details (sample size, data provenance, expert qualifications, adjudication, MRMC, standalone performance), or ground truth establishment based solely on the text provided. This information would typically be found in the actual 510(k) submission document itself (which is not provided), or in a separate study report or technical documentation for the device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Stat Profile Critical Care Xpress Analyzer is intended for in vitro diagnostic use by health care professionals and for point-of-care usage in the quantitative determination of pH, PCO2, PO2, SO2%, Hematocrit (Hct), total Hemoglobin (tHb), Oxyhemoglobin (O2Hb), Carboxyhemoglobin (COHb), Methemoglobin (MetHb), Reduced Hemoglobin (HHb), Oxygen content (O2Ct), Oxygen capacity (02Cap), and total Bilirubin (tBil) in heparinized whole blood; Na+, K+, Cl-, Ca++, Mg++, Glucose (Gu), Lactate (Lac), BUN (Urea), and Creatinine (Creat) in heparinized whole blood, serum, or plasma. Total Bilirubin (tBil) was not evaluated on neonatal samples.

The intended use of the Nova Stat Profile Critical Care Xpress CO-Oximeter Calibrator Cartridge with Bilirubin and Deproteinizing Solution is for the quantitative determination of total hemoglobin, oxyhemoglobin, carboxyhemoglobin, methemoglobin, deoxyhemoglobin and total bilirubin in human blood using the Stat Profile Critical Care Xpress CO-Oximeter Analyzer.

Nova Stat Profile Critical Care Xpress CO-Oximeter Controls and Autocartridge QC are intended for in vitro diagnostic use by healthcare professionals for monitoring the performance of Nova Biomedical Stat Profile Critical Care Xpress Analyzers.

Not Found

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification decision letter from the FDA to Nova Biomedical Corporation for their Stat Profile Critical Care Xpress (CCX 1+) System. It grants market clearance for the device based on substantial equivalence to existing predicate devices.

The document does not contain details about acceptance criteria, device performance studies, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, or any other information requested in your prompt. This type of FDA letter confirms regulatory clearance but does not typically include the technical study results.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request using the provided text. To answer your questions, I would need access to the actual 510(k) submission document or a summary thereof, which would contain the performance data and study details.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter is intended for in vitro diagnostic use by health care professionals and for Point-Of-Care usage for the quantitative measurement of glucose in capillary, venous and arterial whole blood. It is indicated for use in a clinical setting by healthcare professionals as an aid to monitor the effectiveness of diabetes control.

Nova StatStrip Glucose Test Strips are intended for use only with the StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter for quantitative tests. The glucose meter is intended to quantitatively measure glucose (sugar) in whole blood. The Glucose Meter is calibrated to provide plasma equivalent results to laboratory methods. Nova StatStrip Glucose Test Strips are for testing outside the body (in vitro diagnostic use only).

Nova StatStrip Control Solutions is intended for use with the Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter and Nova StatStrip Glucose Test Strips as a quality control check to verify the accuracy of blood glucose test results. There are three levels of controls, (Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3). These solutions will be offered for sale separately from the meter.

Nova StatStrip Glucose Linearity Kit solutions are used to check the linearity of the Nova StatStrip Glucose Hospital Meter System.

Not Found

This is a 510(k) premarket notification for a glucose meter and does not contain the detailed study information typically found in a clinical trial report or a scientific publication describing device performance and acceptance criteria. The provided document is an FDA clearance letter and an Indications for Use statement.

Therefore, I cannot provide a table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance or details about a study that proves the device meets specific criteria based solely on the provided text. The document states that the FDA reviewed the premarket notification and determined the device is "substantially equivalent" to legally marketed predicate devices, which is the basis for its clearance, rather than proof of meeting specific, pre-defined acceptance criteria in a detailed study report within this document.

For a glucose meter, acceptance criteria typically relate to accuracy (e.g., bias, precision, and agreement with a reference method as per ISO 15197 for point-of-care blood glucose monitoring systems) and other performance characteristics, but these specific criteria and the data to prove them are not in this clearance letter.

To answer your specific questions in the format requested, based only on the provided text, I can state:

1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:
   Not provided in this document. The document primarily concerns the FDA's substantial equivalence determination, not a detailed presentation of performance data against specific acceptance criteria.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):
   Not provided in this document.

3. 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):
   Not applicable or not provided. For a glucose meter, ground truth is typically established by laboratory reference methods (e.g., YSI 2300 STAT Plus Glucose & Lactate Analyzer), not expert readers.

4. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
   Not applicable or not provided.

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 a glucose meter, not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging device.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only, without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
   A glucose meter inherently operates "standalone" in generating a quantitative reading. However, the details of its standalone performance testing (e.g., accuracy against a reference method) are not included in this document.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc):
   While not explicitly stated in this document, for glucose meters, the ground truth is typically established using a high-precision laboratory reference method (e.g., hexokinase method on a central laboratory analyzer).

8. The sample size for the training set:
   Not applicable or not provided. This device is likely using established electrochemical principles; modern machine learning "training sets" are not typically used for this type of device in the same way they would be for an AI algorithm.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
   Not applicable or not provided.

Ask a specific question about this device

Nova Glucose Low/High Level Control Solutions are assayed quality control materials, which are used to verify the performance of BD Logic Blood Glucose Monitor, BD Latitude Diabetes Management System, BD/MiniMed Blood Glucose Monitor, and MiniMed Paradigm Link Blood Glucose Monitor. This control is an OTC product intended for use in the home setting.

The Nova Glucose Low/High Level Control Solutions are for in vitro diagnostic use ONLY.

Nova Glucose Low/High Level Control Solutions

The provided documents do not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving that a device meets such criteria. The documents are a 510(k) premarket notification letter for "Nova Glucose Low/High Level Control Solutions" and its "Indications for Use" statement.

Specifically, the letter is a determination by the FDA that the Nova Glucose Low/High Level Control Solutions are substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device. This type of notification does not typically include detailed study results or acceptance criteria in the public release.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, device performance, sample sizes, data provenance, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, ground truth types, or training set details from the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device