Search Results

A surgeon's glove is device made of natural or synthetic rubber intended to be worn by the operating room personnel to protect a surgical wound from contamination.

A surgeon's glove is device made of natural or synthetic rubber intended to be worn by the operating room personnel to protect a surgical wound from contamination.

This document is a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for Uniject Powdered Latex Surgical Gloves (K970160). It declares the device substantially equivalent to pre-amendment devices. It describes the device's indications for use: "A surgeon's glove is device made of natural or synthetic rubber intended to be worn by the operating room personnel to protect a surgical wound from contamination."

However, this document does not contain any information regarding acceptance criteria, device performance studies, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, or expert involvement. These details would typically be found in the 510(k) submission itself, not in the clearance letter.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested table and information based on the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device

A patient examination gloves is a disposable device intended for medical purposes that is worn on the examiner's hand or finger to prevent contamination between patient and examiner,

Not Found

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

No acceptance criteria or study details are provided in the document.

The document primarily focuses on the regulatory approval of the gloves based on substantial equivalence. It does not contain information about:

1. Acceptance criteria table or reported device performance: This document explicitly states substantial equivalence, which means the device performs as well as an already-approved predicate device. It doesn't present specific performance metrics or acceptance criteria for those metrics.
2. Sample size for the test set or data provenance: No performance testing data is presented or referenced.
3. Number of experts and qualifications for ground truth: Not applicable as no specific study data requiring ground truth establishment is detailed.
4. Adjudication method: Not applicable.
5. Multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study: Not applicable.
6. Standalone performance: Not applicable. The approval is based on substantial equivalence to existing devices, not a standalone performance study as described for AI algorithms.
7. Type of ground truth used: Not applicable.
8. Sample size for the training set: Not applicable as this is not an AI/ML device requiring a training set.
9. How ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

The document is a regulatory approval letter, not a device performance study report.

Ask a specific question about this device