Search Results

A patient examination glove is a disposable device intended for medical purpose that is worn on the examiner's hand or finger to prevent contamination between patient and examiner.
These gloves were tested for use with Chemotherapy Drugs as per ASTM D6978-05 standard practice for assessment of medical gloves to permeation by chemotherapy drugs.

Nitrile Examination Powder Free Glove, White, Black, Orange Nitrile Examination Powder Free Gloves Tested For Use With Chemotherapy Drugs, Blue

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification clearance letter for several types of Nitrile Examination Powder Free Gloves. It does not describe an AI/ML device or a medical imaging device. Therefore, the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, study details, ground truth, sample sizes, and expert qualifications is not applicable to this document.

The document primarily focuses on the regulatory clearance for general medical gloves and a specific type tested for chemotherapy drug permeation. The information provided relates to:

• Device Names: Nitrile Examination Powder Free Glove (White, Black, Orange) and Nitrile Examination Powder Free Glove Tested for Use with Chemotherapy Drugs (Blue).
• Intended Use: Disposable device worn on the examiner's hand to prevent contamination between patient and examiner.
• Regulatory Classification: Class I, Product Code LZA, LZC.
• Chemotherapy Drug Permeation Data (for the blue gloves only): A table listing chemotherapy drugs, their concentrations, and breakthrough detection times as per ASTM D6978-05 standard. This is the only "performance data" presented, showing how long it takes for a chemotherapy drug to permeate the glove.

Since this document pertains to physical medical devices (gloves) and not software or imaging devices, the specific questions about AI/ML performance metrics, studies, and ground truth establishment are not relevant.

Ask a specific question about this device

Blue Powder Free Nitrile Examination Gloves Tested For Use With Chemotherapy Drugs glove is a disposable device intended for medical purpose that is worn on the examiner's hand or finger to prevent contamination between patient and examiner.

in addition, these gloves were tested for use with Chemotherapy drugs in accordance with ASTM D6978-05 Standard Practice for Assessment of Medical gloves to Permeation by Chemotherapy Drugs:

The maximum testing time is 240 minutes. Please note that the following drugs have extremely low permeation time of less than 30 minutes

Carmustine (BCNU)3.3mg/ml(3,300ppm) Thiotepa, 10.0mg/ml ( 10,000ppm)

Not Found

This document details the acceptance criteria and performance for "Blue Powder Free Nitrile Examination Gloves Tested For Use With Chemotherapy Drugs" in the context of their ability to prevent permeation by chemotherapy drugs.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Note: The document specifies that the maximum testing time is 240 minutes. For Carmustine and Thiotepa, while specific acceptance criteria in the ">X" format are not given, the note highlights their extremely low permeation times, which can be interpreted as a disclosure rather than a failure of an acceptance criterion that requires >240 minutes.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not explicitly stated in the provided document. The study refers to testing in accordance with ASTM D6978-05. The sample size would be dictated by the requirements of this standard.
• Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated. The testing was performed in accordance with ASTM D6978-05, which is an international standard.

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

This document describes a physical performance test for medical gloves against chemotherapy drugs, not a diagnostic or clinical AI study. Therefore, the concept of "experts establishing ground truth" in the diagnostic sense does not apply here. The "ground truth" is the objective measurement of breakthrough time, determined by standardized laboratory procedures.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

Not applicable. This is a laboratory performance test based on a standardized methodology (ASTM D6978-05), not a situation requiring expert adjudication of subjective assessments.

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 document pertains to the physical performance of a medical device (gloves), not an AI-assisted diagnostic or imaging system involving human readers.

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

Not applicable. This is a physical performance test of a medical device (gloves), not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used

The ground truth used is the objective measurement of chemotherapy drug permeation breakthrough time, determined by a standardized laboratory method, specifically ASTM D6978-05. This is a quantitative, empirical measurement.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This is a physical performance test for a medical device (gloves), not an AI model that requires a training set.

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

Not applicable. As this is not an AI model, there is no training set or ground truth for a training set in this context.

Ask a specific question about this device

The glove is disposable and intended for Medical purpose that is worn on the examiner's hand to prevent contamination between the patient and the examiner.

POWDER FREE LATEX EXAMINATION GLOVES WITH ALOE VERA AND - PROTEIN CONTENT LABELING CLAIM (50 MICROGRAMS OR LESS)

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification letter from the FDA regarding "Powder Free Latex Examination Gloves with Aloe Vera and Protein Content Labeling Claim (50 Micrograms or Less)." This type of regulatory document concerns the substantial equivalence of a medical device to a legally marketed predicate device, primarily focusing on its safety and effectiveness for its intended use.

The document does not contain information about acceptance criteria, device performance studies, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, expert qualifications, or comparative effectiveness studies (MRMC or standalone AI performance). These details are typically found in the supporting documentation submitted with the 510(k) application, which is not provided in this extract.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information based on the given text.

Ask a specific question about this device

Latex examination powderfree gloves are worn on the hands of health care and similar personnel to prevent contamination between health care personnel and the patient.

Not Found

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification letter from the FDA regarding "Top Glove Latex Examination Gloves, Contains 50 Micrograms or Less of Total Water Extractable Protein Per Gram." This type of document is a regulatory approval, not a scientific study report. It confirms substantial equivalence to a predicate device but does not contain detailed information about acceptance criteria for device performance or a study demonstrating that the device meets those criteria.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information such as:

• A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This document confirms regulatory compliance, not performance data against specific criteria like sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy for a diagnostic device.
• Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable as no specific performance study is detailed.
• Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable.
• Adjudication method: Not applicable.
• 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, as this is a medical glove, not an AI-assisted diagnostic device.
• If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable.
• The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): Not applicable.
• The sample size for the training set: Not applicable.
• How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

The letter explicitly states: "We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent...". This indicates a comparison to existing, legally marketed predicate devices, rather than a novel performance study against specific acceptance criteria in the manner of an AI/diagnostic device. The "Indications For Use" section simply describes the purpose of exam gloves.

Ask a specific question about this device

Synthetic Vinyl Medical Examination Powdered Gloves are worn on the hands of Health care and similar personnel to prevent contamination between health care personnel and the patient.

SYNTHETIC VINYL MEDICAL EXAMINATION POWDERED GLOVES

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter (K993664) for "Synthetic Vinyl Medical Examination Powdered Gloves" does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study demonstrating the device meets such criteria in terms of performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, etc., which are typically associated with diagnostic or AI-powered devices.

Instead, this document is a clearance letter for a Class I medical device (gloves) and pertains to its substantial equivalence to a predicate device already on the market. For such devices, the primary "acceptance criteria" are related to manufacturing quality, safety (e.g., biocompatibility, freedom from harmful substances), and performance standards applicable to gloves (e.g., barrier integrity, tensile strength), rather than detailed clinical performance metrics.

The letter explicitly states: "We have reviewed your Section 510(k) notification of intent to market the device referenced above and we have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976."

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information as it is not present in the provided document. The 510(k) process for this type of device focuses on demonstrating equivalence to a legally marketed predicate, rather than an extensive clinical study with performance metrics in the way your prompt describes for AI or diagnostic devices.

Ask a specific question about this device

Pepper Green Mint Powdered Latex Examination Gloves are worn on the hands of health care and similar personnel to prevent contamination between health care personnel and the patient.

Not Found

The provided document is a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for "Pepper Green Mint Powdered Latex Examination Gloves." This document does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving that a device meets acceptance criteria. It is a regulatory clearance for a medical device (gloves), not a performance study or a report on AI/software device validation.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, study details, sample sizes, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, ground truth types, or training set details from this document.

Ask a specific question about this device

Powdered Green Latex Examination Gloves (vith minimum length of 280mm) are worn on the hands of Health care and similar personnel to give an additional protection until the arm to prevent contamination between health care personnel and the patient especially for the Emergency Medical Service.

Powdered Green Latex Examination Glove

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification letter from the FDA regarding "Green Powdered Latex Examination Gloves." It confirms that the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices.

This document does not contain information about acceptance criteria, device performance studies, or clinical trial details. It is a regulatory approval letter based on "substantial equivalence" to existing devices, not a report on a new device's performance against specific criteria.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information from this text. The questions you've asked typically relate to detailed technical or clinical studies supporting a device's efficacy and safety, which are not present in this regulatory correspondence.

Ask a specific question about this device

Synthetic Vinyl Medical Examination Powder Free Gloves are worn on the hands of health care and similar personnel to prevent contamination between health care personnel and the patient.

SYNTHETIC VINYL MEDICAL EXAMINATION POWDER FREE GLOVE

This document is a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for a medical device: "Synthetic Vinyl Medical Examination Powder Free Glove" manufactured by Top Glove Sdn. Bhd. It concerns regulatory clearance for marketing the device, not a study report or acceptance criteria for a specific performance characteristic of the glove itself (e.g., tear resistance, sterility, absence of holes).

Therefore, based on the provided document, I cannot answer the questions about acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria. The letter addresses the device's substantial equivalence to a predicate device, allowing it to be marketed, rather than presenting a performance study.

Here's why each specific point cannot be addressed from the given text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This document does not contain any performance acceptance criteria or reported device performance data for the gloves (e.g., tensile strength, puncture resistance, barrier integrity). It's a regulatory clearance, not a test report.

2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable, as no performance test data or test set is presented.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable, as no performance test data or ground truth establishment is discussed.

4. Adjudication method for the test set: Not applicable, as no performance test data or adjudication is discussed.

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 document is for medical examination gloves and does not involve AI or human readers for diagnostic purposes.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable, as this device is a physical glove, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc): Not applicable, as ground truth is relevant for diagnostic or AI performance studies, which this is not.

8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable, as this is a physical medical device, not an AI algorithm requiring a training set.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable, as this is a physical medical device, not an AI algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device

The glove is disposable and intended for Medical purpose that is worn on the examiner's hand to prevent contamination between the patient and the examiner.

Polymer Coated Powder-Free Latex Examination Gloves

The provided FDA document is a 510(k) clearance letter for "Polymer Coated Powder-Free Latex Examination Gloves" (K990690). This document is an approval for a medical device and not a study report for a diagnostic AI device. Therefore, it does not contain the information required to answer the questions about acceptance criteria and study details for an AI-powered device.

Specifically, the document:

1. Does not describe any AI device. It's for a physical product (gloves).
2. Does not present acceptance criteria in the context of an algorithm's performance (e.g., sensitivity, specificity).
3. Does not include any study data relating to algorithm performance, sample sizes, ground truth, or expert review.
4. Does not mention multi-reader multi-case studies or standalone algorithm performance.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information from the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device

POWDERED LATEX EXAMINATION GLOVES ARE WORN ON THE HANDS OF HEALITE CARE AND SIMILAR PERSONNEL TO PREVENT CONTAMINATION BETWEEN HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL AND THE PATIENT.

POWDERED LATEX EXAMINATION GLOVES WITH PROTEIN LABELLING (100 MICROGRAM OR LESS)

This document is a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for "Powdered Latex Examination Gloves W/Protein Trade Name: Labeling (100 Micrograms or Less Per Gram)". This type of regulatory submission is for a medical device that demonstrates substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device.

The information provided does not contain details about specific acceptance criteria or a study that proves the device meets those criteria in the context of performance metrics (like sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, etc.) for a diagnostic or AI-powered device.

Instead, the letter indicates that the device has been found substantially equivalent to predicate devices, meaning it has the same intended use and technological characteristics as a device already on the market, or if there are differences, they do not raise different questions of safety and effectiveness.

Here's what can be inferred from the document regarding the device and its regulatory status, and why it doesn't provide the requested information:

• Device Type: Powdered Latex Examination Gloves with Protein Labeling (100 Micrograms or Less)
• Regulatory Class: I (General Controls)
• Product Code: LYY
• Intended Use: "POWDERED LATEX EXAMINATION GLOVES ARE WORN ON THE HANDS OF HEALTH CARE AND SIMILAR PERSONNEL TO PREVENT CONTAMINATION BETWEEN HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL AND THE PATIENT."

Why the requested information is absent:

The questions you've asked (about acceptance criteria tables, sample sizes, expert ground truth, MRMC studies, standalone performance, training sets, etc.) are typically associated with the evaluation of diagnostic devices, AI/ML-driven software, or devices with measurable performance outcomes that require clinical validation studies to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

For a Class I device like examination gloves, the "acceptance criteria" for 510(k) clearance primarily revolve around demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device. This usually involves:

1. Same Intended Use: As stated in the document.
2. Similar Technological Characteristics: This would involve comparing material, design, manufacturing processes, and performance specifications (e.g., tensile strength, barrier integrity, protein content for label claims) to a predicate device.
3. Meeting Recognized Standards: Often, these devices must meet specific ASTM or ISO standards for medical gloves (e.g., ASTM D3578 for medical examination gloves).
4. Labeling: The label claims, particularly regarding protein content (100 micrograms or less per gram), are a key aspect and would need to be supported by testing.

The "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" for a glove would likely be a series of non-clinical bench tests (e.g., integrity testing, physical properties testing, protein content assays) showing compliance with relevant standards and the advertised protein level, rather than clinical trials with human subjects or expert consensus.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested table and detailed study information because this document (a 510(k) clearance letter for examination gloves) does not contain that type of data. It confirms regulatory clearance based on substantial equivalence, but not the specific performance metrics and validation study details you'd find for more complex diagnostic or AI-enabled devices.

Ask a specific question about this device