Search Results

The LifeGuard and BacTrack B90 devices are intended to measure alcohol in human breath. Measurements obtained from these devices are used in the diagnosis of alcohol intoxication.

The LifeGuard and BacTrack B90 devices are intended to be used by the general adult population and by qualified personnel, such as physicians, nurses, and technicians.

The LifeGuard and BacTrack B90 devices are intended to be used by adults (age 21 and over) in measuring alcohol intoxication in themselves or others.

The LifeGuard and BacTrack B90 devices are intended to be used in both home (over-the-counter) and clinical settings.

The LifeGuard product is a breath alcohol detector designed to sample the patient's deep lung air in order to test for the presence of alcohol in the blood. The sensor used in the LifeGuard is an electrochemical fuel cell sensor. When the patient exhales into the device, after 4 seconds a sample of the breath is pumped into the fuel cell and generates an electrical current. The amount and duration of the current has a known relationship to the concentration of alcohol in the breath sample. The relationship between the alcohol concentration in the deep lung breath and in the blood is known by Henry's law with a ratio of 2100:1.

The BacTrack B90 has the same intended use, description and performance characteristics as the LifeGuard with a different physical appearance.

Both the LifeGuard and BacTrack B90 products are handheld and are used with a single-use disposable mouthpiece and a replaceable 9 volt battery.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the LifeGuard and BacTrack B90 devices, focusing on the acceptance criteria and the study that proves they meet those criteria:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The primary acceptance criterion mentioned is accuracy. The device's performance is directly compared to its predicates.

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

The document mentions "laboratory bench testing" and "user studies,". However, specific sample sizes for the test set or information on data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) are NOT provided in the given text.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Their Qualifications:

The document does not provide information on the number or qualifications of experts used to establish ground truth for the test set.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

The document does not specify any adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and Effect Size:

No Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study is mentioned. This device is a breathalyzer, so the concept of "human readers" interpreting images with and without AI assistance is not applicable. The device provides a direct measurement.

6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done:

The "laboratory bench testing" described for the device would represent its standalone performance, as it verifies the hardware and firmware performance against specifications. However, the exact details of this testing (e.g., specific algorithms or human intervention) are not extensively detailed, beyond its function as a breath alcohol detector.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

For the accuracy testing, the ground truth would likely be established by a calibrated alcohol standard or controlled human breath samples with known alcohol concentrations. While not explicitly stated, this is the standard method for establishing ground truth in breath alcohol measurement devices. The document implies this through the accuracy claims. The statement "The relationship between the alcohol concentration in the deep lung breath and in the blood is known by Henry's law with a ratio of 2100:1" indicates the scientific basis for the measurement, further implying a quantitative ground truth for alcohol concentration.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

The document does not provide any information regarding a training set or its sample size. This type of device relies on a fixed scientific principle (electrochemical fuel cell and Henry's law) rather than machine learning algorithms that typically require large training datasets.

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

As there's no mention of a training set in the context of machine learning, this question is not applicable. The device's underlying principle is a direct chemical measurement, not a learned model from data. The device's 'training' or calibration would be through manufacturing processes and in-field calibration against known alcohol standards.

Summary of Study Details Provided in the Text:

The text states that the device meets acceptance criteria through:

• Laboratory bench testing: To verify hardware and firmware performance against specifications. This would explicitly test accuracy and other technical parameters.
• NRTL safety testing: To certify compliance with US and European safety standards.
• User studies: To validate that the device met user requirements and that labeling was adequate.

The conclusion asserts that "the LifeGuard design, feature set, verification and validation results, and agency testing reports demonstrate that the LifeGuard breath alcohol tester is a safe, effective product that is substantially equivalent to other FDA cleared alcohol breath testing products." This implies that the tests conducted were sufficient to demonstrate equivalence in terms of safety and effectiveness to the predicate devices, particularly in the realm of accuracy.

Ask a specific question about this device

The LifeGuard™ is a guaiac-based test for the qualitative detection of occult blood in stool, which may indicate gastrointestinal disease. Patients can purchase the test without a prescription from stores or Internet distributors in order to perform testing at home. Users obtain their own stool samples by wiping onto the test device, then develop the tests, read the test results, and send a report of the results to their physician. LifeGuard™ is useful as an aid in the diagnosis of a number of gastrointestinal disorders and is used for colorectal cancer screening programs. The American Cancer Society recommends that at least three consecutive bowel movements be tested due to the irregularity of bleeding from some intestinal lesions. Therefore, the LifeGuard™ home test kit includes three test wipes for testing three closely spaced bowel movements.

The LifeGuard™ is a guaiac-based test for the qualitative detection of occult blood in stool.

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification acceptance letter for the LifeGuard™ occult blood test. It confirms that the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices. However, this document does not contain any information about acceptance criteria, device performance, or any studies conducted.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information. The document focuses solely on the regulatory approval process and includes no technical or clinical study data.

Ask a specific question about this device

The LifeGuard™ Safety Infusion Set is used to access implanted vascular ports to administer fluids and/or to withdraw blood. The LifeGuard™ Safety Infusion Set facilitates safe removal of the needle by encapsulating the needle during vascular port de-accessing to help prevent needlestick injuries.

The LifeGuard™ Infusion Set is a standard 90° non-coring needle intravascular administration set with a sharps injury protection. The LifeGuard™ Infusion Set is designed for use with vascular access devices. The needle is inserted into the vascular access port in a standard manner for fluid infusion or for blood sampling. The components that comprise the LifeGuard™ Safety Infusion Set includes the following: a PVC tubing set; a white clamp to prevent fluid flow; a universal female luer lock connector to connect to infusion/aspiration devices; a white cap to close the female luer; a winged needle holder to secure the infusion set to the patient with a pre-attached 90° non-coring needle to access the implanted port and allow the user to pull the needle up into the safety position; a needle trap encapsulates the needle after de-accessing the needle from the implanted port; and a needle guard shrouds the needle before use. Some models include a Ysite as an alternate female luer injection site with an additional white cap and white clamp to prevent fluid flow. A thermoformed tray with a heat sealed tyvek lid provides a sterile barrier. The LifeGuard™ Safety Infusion Set is fabricated from biocompatible, medical grade materials. The LifeGuard™ Safety Infusion Sets are supplied as sterile, non-latex, nonpyrogenic, intended for single use only and are manufactured out of non-DEHP PVC. De-accessing the needle is done as with any standard non-coring needle, using a one-handed (dominant hand) technique to remove the needle while stabilizing the port with the nondominate hand. As the needle is removed, the passive sharps injury protection feature is actuated by sliding the needle holder upward, · which encapsulates the needle within the needle trap.

The provided text describes a medical device, the LifeGuard™ Safety Infusion Set, and details its performance through a "Simulated Use Study". This study focuses on the effectiveness of the sharps injury protection feature.

Here's a breakdown of the requested information based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Study Details:

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

   • Sample Size: n=500 for the Simulated Use Study.
   • Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin. It is a "Simulated Use Study," implying controlled conditions rather than retrospective or prospective patient data from real-world usage.

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

   • The document does not provide details on the number or qualifications of experts used to establish ground truth for this specific "Simulated Use Study." The study focuses on a measurable mechanical failure rate of the safety feature.

3. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:

   • The document does not describe an adjudication method for the test set. Given the nature of a "failure rate" for a mechanical safety feature, an adjudication process involving human interpretation is unlikely in the same way it would be for diagnostic imaging.

4. 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:

   • No, a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not performed. This device is a mechanical infusion set with a safety feature, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for human readers.

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

   • This question is not applicable. The device is a physical medical device, not an algorithm. The "Simulated Use Study" evaluates the physical device's performance, which inherently includes human interaction (users pulling the needle up) to actuate the safety feature but measures the device's mechanical success.

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

   • The ground truth for the Simulated Use Study appears to be based on the direct observation and quantification of the mechanical failure of the sharps injury protection feature. There is no indication of expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data being used to establish this specific ground truth. It's a binary outcome: the safety feature either successfully encapsulates the needle or it fails.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • The document does not mention a "training set." The study described is a "Simulated Use Study" to test the performance of the final device, not to train a machine learning model.

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

   • Not applicable, as no training set is mentioned in the context of this device's evaluation.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Lifeguard Nasal CPAP mask is intended to be used to provide nasal CPAP, when used with devices that provided an exhalation port, devices that provide When about with devices that support the mask against the patient's face. The mask is intended for re-use by a single patient.

Lifeguard Nasal CPAP Mask

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain information about acceptance criteria, device performance results, or any study details that would allow me to populate the requested table and answer the subsequent questions. The document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for a "Lifeguard Nasal CPAP Mask," confirming its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. It defines the product and its intended use but does not include any performance data or study specifics.

Ask a specific question about this device