Search Results

The Healthline RediNeb® Small Volume Medication Nebulizer (SVN) is indicated to aerosolize medication approved for nebulization by a physician. The Healthline RediNeb® Medication Nebulizer is intended for adult and pediatric patients consistent with the indications for aerosolized medication to or through the patient's pulmonary system.

The RediNeb® Nebulizer device is for patient use in all areas where the administration of medication by aerosol means is warranted. This includes hospital/institutional settings, home care use, schools and long term care facilities.

The RediNeb® is basically a miniaturized jet nebulizer, functioning very similarly to both of the predicate devices. Physical differences are that the maximum fill volume is 3 ml versus 6ml and design is such that the RediNeb® can be incorporated with breath enhanced features of a manifold delivery body. The RediNeb® nebulizer, though very small in size (creating minimal waste if used once and discarded), is fabricated of polymers such that it may be properly cleaned for reuse multiple times.

The provided text is a 510(k) Premarket Notification for a medical device called the RediNeb® Small Volume Medication Nebulizer. This document describes the device, its intended use, and its substantial equivalence to predicate devices based on technological characteristics and performance specifications.

However, the information provided does not contain details about acceptance criteria, the study design, sample sizes for test or training sets, ground truth establishment, or any data related to AI or human reader performance. The document is a regulatory submission demonstrating substantial equivalence to already approved devices, primarily through comparison of key performance characteristics.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill all parts of your request as the information is not present in the provided text. I can, however, extract the acceptance criteria (which are implied by the predicate device's performance) and the reported device performance.

Here's what can be extracted from the document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are implicitly defined by the performance of the predicate devices, which the RediNeb® is claiming substantial equivalence to. The study involved comparing the characteristics of the RediNeb® to two predicate devices: the Salter NebuTech and the Medi/Nuclear Neb-3A SVN.

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

• Sample Size for the Test Set: Not specified. The document doesn't detail a "test set" in the context of clinical trials or data analysis. The comparison is based on device specifications and performance characteristics, likely measured in a laboratory setting.
• Data Provenance: Not specified. The data provided is a summary of technical specifications and performance measurements, not clinical data from patients or a retrospective/prospective study.

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

• Not applicable. This device is a nebulizer, a mechanical device. The "ground truth" here relates to its physical and functional performance, not interpretations that require expert consensus (like medical imaging).

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

• Not applicable. (See #3 explanation).

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 a mechanical medical device (nebulizer), not an AI-powered diagnostic or assistive tool. Therefore, MRMC studies or AI involvement are not relevant.

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

• Not applicable. (See #5 explanation).

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):

• The "ground truth" for this device's performance are the physical and functional specifications (e.g., particle size, aerosol generation rate, gas flow rate) measured and verified, likely through standard engineering and laboratory testing methods for nebulizers.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Not applicable. This is not an AI/machine learning device, so there is no concept of a "training set."

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

• Not applicable. (See #8 explanation).

In summary, the provided document describes a regulatory submission for a medical device, focusing on its substantial equivalence to existing devices based on technical specifications rather than clinical trials or AI-related performance metrics.

Ask a specific question about this device