Search Results

Not Found

The Multi-Centrifuge is a device that includes a centrifuge and a manual hematocrit reader. The hematocrit reader utilizes various distances to calculate a ratio (Hct) of Red Blood Cells to blood sample volume. These distances are at key separation (interface) points marked by the user. The device uses a flat disk rotor, resulting in interface points that are perpendicular to the hematocrit tube length. The marked interface points are Sealant/Red Blood Cells (Point A), Red Blood Cells/Plasma (Point B), and Plasma/Air (Point C). A microprocessor uses the equation (A + B) / (A + C) x 100 to calculate the ratio. The device has a larger LCD display compared to the predicate device.

The provided text does not describe a study involving acceptance criteria and device performance in the typical sense of a clinical or performance study for a medical device that measures or analyzes biological data. Instead, it focuses on the safety and effectiveness of a Multi-Centrifuge, particularly highlighting aspects related to its manual hematocrit reader.

Here's an analysis based on the provided text, addressing the requested points where applicable:

Acceptance Criteria and Study Details for the Multi-Centrifuge

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

The provided text presents a comparison table of "Concerns" between the Multi-Centrifuge and a predicate device (Hematostat C-70) related to safety features, not performance metrics like accuracy, sensitivity, or specificity for a diagnostic output.

Additional Performance-Related Details (Specific to the Hematocrit Reader):

The text discusses the algorithmic equation for hematocrit calculation and highlights differences between the Multi-Centrifuge and the Hematostat C-70.

• Multi-Centrifuge Equation: (A + B) / (A + C) x 100 = XX.X%
  • Reported Advantage: Uses a flat disk rotor, resulting in interface points perpendicular to the hematocrit tube. This, combined with a larger LCD display, is stated to provide "ease of use and consistency" for marking interface points.
• Hematostat C-70 Equation: (A + B) / (A + C) x Af x 100% = XX.X%
  • Reported Disadvantage: Uses a 70° fixed angle Hct rotor, causing interface points to have a 70° angle. This, along with a small LCD display, is stated to make it "difficult and leads to potential inconsistencies for the user when marking each interface point."

Acceptance Criteria (Implied):
Based on the text, the implied acceptance criteria for the Multi-Centrifuge, particularly concerning its hematocrit reader, are primarily related to:

• Safety equivalence to predicate devices for general centrifuge operation.
• Ease of use and consistency in hematocrit reading, specifically by eliminating the "angle factor" and having a larger display compared to the Hematostat C-70.
• No increased risk to safety or diminished effectiveness compared to predicate devices.

2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance
The document does not describe a test set, sample size, or data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) for evaluating the performance of the hematocrit reader in terms of accuracy against a ground truth. The discussion is qualitative regarding usability.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts
This information is not provided as no formal "test set" and "ground truth" establishment for performance evaluation are described.

4. Adjudication method for the test set
This information is not provided as no formal "test set" or adjudication process is described.

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
This information is not provided. The device is a manual hematocrit reader, not an AI-assisted system. No MRMC study is mentioned.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
This information is not provided. The hematocrit calculation is explicitly "marked by the user," indicating a human-in-the-loop process. The "standalone" performance of the algorithm without user input is not discussed, as it's designed to be user-interactive.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)
This information is not provided. The document focuses on the method of calculation and the usability of the marking process rather than validating accuracy against a clinical ground truth.

8. The sample size for the training set
This information is not provided. No "training set" for an algorithm is mentioned in the context of machine learning. The equation provided is a deterministic formula based on user input.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
This information is not provided as there is no mention of a training set or machine learning algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device