Search Results

The Element system is intended to be used exclusively for myoelectric exoprosthetic fittings of the upper limb.

The Element system is a surface electromyography (EMG) electrode system that is to be used with upper limb prosthetic devices. Element outputs standard envelop EMG signals detected from EMG electrodes (IBT Electrodes) placed on the user's skin. These signals are used as inputs by connected prosthetic devices, such as hands, wrists or elbows. The Element system is an alternative to standard suction socket myoelectrodes, with the advantages of a lower profile, digital signal processing, and wireless gain adjustment. Element does not replace or modify any functionality of connected prosthetic components.

Element is compatible with most hands, wrists, and elbows that accept standard analog EMG electrode inputs. The Element system is typically sold with three-port kidney-style output connectors, however alternative connectors may be used to ensure compatibility with other terminal devices. The Element system accepts power from IBT's FlexCell Battery system and outputs control EMG signals to hands, wrists, or other prosthetic components. The Element system is installed in the prosthesis by a trained prosthetist and connected to prosthetic components selected to meet the needs of the individual user.

System components:

• IBT Electrodes (up to 2)
• Signal Processing Box
• Element Desktop Software

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for the Infinite Biomedical Technologies (IBT) Element System with IBT Electrodes. It outlines the device's characteristics, comparison to a predicate device, and the testing conducted to demonstrate substantial equivalence.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study information, addressing your specific questions:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document doesn't explicitly present a table of acceptance criteria with corresponding pass/fail results for each criterion to demonstrate "device performance" in terms of clinical outcomes or specific quantitative metrics for the Element System's functionality as a myoelectric signal processor. Instead, it focuses on demonstrating safety and effectiveness through adherence to recognized standards and successful completion of various verification and validation tests.

However, we can infer acceptance criteria from the "Performance Data" section. The acceptance criterion for each test is generally "Pass," indicating that the device met the requirements of the specified standard or test protocol.

Here's a table based on the provided "Performance Data":

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

The document does not specify the sample sizes used for the various verification and validation tests listed. It also does not provide details on data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective) for these tests. The tests mentioned are primarily laboratory-based simulations and regulatory standard adherence, not clinical trials with patient data.

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 in the document. The tests described are engineering and regulatory compliance validations rather than diagnostic or interpretative studies requiring expert ground truth establishment. For example, "Signal Performance during Simulated Use" would likely involve objective measurements against predefined specifications, not expert consensus on an interpretation.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This information is not provided and is generally not applicable to the types of engineering and regulatory compliance tests described. Adjudication methods (like 2+1, 3+1) are common in clinical studies where multiple human readers interpret data, and an agreed-upon truth is needed.

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

A Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done and is not applicable to this device. The Element System is a myoelectric signal processing unit for prosthetic control, not an AI-assisted diagnostic or interpretive tool that human readers would use. The document describes the system as an alternative to standard suction socket myoelectrodes, with advantages like a lower profile, digital signal processing, and wireless gain adjustment, but it doesn't involve "AI assistance" in the sense of improving human reader performance.

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

The Element System itself is a standalone algorithm/device for processing myoelectric signals. The performance tests ("Signal Performance during Simulated Use", "Simulated battery life with Element", "Simulated use with Region Specific Noise") would effectively be standalone performance evaluations of the device's electrical and signal processing capabilities, without human user interaction as part of the performance measurement. However, its intended use is with a human user providing the EMG signals and benefiting from its processing for prosthetic control.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)

For the specific tests mentioned, the "ground truth" would be established by:

• Regulatory Standards: For tests like IEC 60601-1, ISO 10993, and UN38.3, the ground truth is adherence to the requirements and specifications defined by these international standards.
• Engineering Specifications: For tests like "Compatibility with IBT Electrodes," "Signal Performance during Simulated Use," and "Simulated Seal," the ground truth would be predefined engineering specifications, performance tolerances, or established benchmarks for electrical signals and mechanical functions.
• Simulated Conditions: For tests involving "simulated use" or "simulated battery life," the ground truth is the controlled and measurable conditions established within the simulation.

There is no mention of expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data being used as ground truth in this submission, as it's not a diagnostic or treatment outcome-focused device.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not mention any training set size. As the Element System with IBT Electrodes is a device that processes myoelectric signals based on predefined algorithms and hardware, it is unlikely to involve "training" in the machine learning sense that would require a distinct training set. The "digital signal processing" and "signal smoothing" functionalities are described as inherent design features or adjustable parameters, rather than learned models.

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

Since no training set is mentioned or implied, the question of how its ground truth was established is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device