Search Results

To be used to convert liquid medication into aerosol for inhalation by patient.

Not Found

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain the detailed information necessary to answer your request about the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them.

The documents are a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for the "Ezflow MAX" device and its "Indication for Use" statement. These documents confirm that the FDA has determined the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices, allowing it to be marketed.

However, a 510(k) clearance letter does not typically include the detailed study results or acceptance criteria from the manufacturer's submission. It's a regulatory letter indicating clearance, not a summary of the underlying performance studies.

Therefore, I cannot extract the following information from the provided text:

• A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
• Sample sizes used for the test set and data provenance
• Number of experts and their qualifications for ground truth
• Adjudication method
• MRMC comparative effectiveness study results
• Standalone performance
• Type of ground truth used
• Sample size for the training set
• How ground truth for the training set was established

Ask a specific question about this device

To be used under proper medical supervision to deliver medicinal aerosol and diagnostic formulation.

EZflow Continuous Nebulizer™ Model 1005

The provided document is a 510(k) premarket notification letter from the FDA to Piper Medical Products regarding their EZflow Continuous Nebulizer™ Model 1005. This letter indicates that the device has been found substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device.

Crucially, this type of FDA correspondence for a 510(k) clearance does not contain acceptance criteria or study data for the device's performance. A 510(k) submission typically relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, which might involve comparing technical characteristics and, in some cases, performance data. However, the FDA letter itself does not detail these studies or their results.

Therefore,Based on the provided document, the following information cannot be extracted:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This document does not contain performance criteria or study results.
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: This document does not describe any specific test set or its provenance.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: This document does not mention the use of experts or ground truth establishment for a test set.
4. Adjudication method for the test set: This document does not describe any adjudication method.
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 document is related to a nebulizer, which is a medical device, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool. Therefore, an MRMC study with AI assistance is not applicable.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: As mentioned above, this device is not an algorithm, so standalone performance is not relevant.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): No ground truth is discussed in relation to performance studies.
8. The sample size for the training set: There is no mention of a training set as this is not an AI/ML device.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

This document serves as a regulatory clearance, indicating that the device is deemed substantially equivalent to a pre-existing device, allowing it to be marketed. Information about specific performance studies and their results would typically be contained within the 510(k) submission itself, not in the FDA's clearance letter.

Ask a specific question about this device

For use with pneumatic small volume nebulizers to deliver aerosolized medication.

Not Found

I am sorry, but based on the provided text, there is no information available regarding the acceptance criteria or any study that proves the device meets specific acceptance criteria. The document is a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for the AeroTee device, which confirms its substantial equivalence to legally marketed predicate devices. It does not contain details about performance studies, statistical analyses, or the metrics you've requested.

Ask a specific question about this device