Search Results
Found 1 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(29 days)
MEDSCAND DISPOSABLE PLASTIC VAGINAL SPECULUM; EASY-SPEC PLASTIC VAGINAL SPECULUM, MODEL 303
The Medscand disposable speculum is intended to expose the interior of a vagina for gynecological procedures.
The Medscand polystyrene speculum is a single-use device to be used by a medical professional to expose the interior of a vagina.
The provided text is a 510(k) summary for a disposable vaginal speculum, not a study performing extensive testing against acceptance criteria using AI or machine learning. Therefore, most of the requested information cannot be extracted directly from this document.
However, I can provide the available information:
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
The document does not specify formal acceptance criteria for device performance. Instead, it focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device.
| Acceptance Criteria (Implied by Substantial Equivalence) | Reported Device Performance (Claimed Equivalence) |
|---|---|
| Same intended use | "The Medscand disposable speculum is a single-use device to be used by a medical professional to expose the interior of a vagina." (Same as predicate) |
| Similar design | "The Medscand disposable vaginal speculum is substantially equivalent to the Galenica disposable vaginal speculum in terms of intended use, design, materials, and principles of operation." |
| Similar materials | "The Medscand disposable vaginal speculum is substantially equivalent to the Galenica disposable vaginal speculum in terms of intended use, design, materials, and principles of operation." |
| Similar principles of operation | "The Medscand disposable vaginal speculum is substantially equivalent to the Galenica disposable vaginal speculum in terms of intended use, design, materials, and principles of operation." |
| Similar dimensions | "The dimensions of the Medscand speculum are similar to those of Galenica speculum, which has been cleared by FDA." |
| Clinical safety and effectiveness (demonstrated by predicate) | "Galenica speculum has been in clinical use since 1984 and the Medscand speculum since 1993 (in Europe)." (Implied by equivalence to predicate and European use) |
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
Not applicable. The document describes a 510(k) submission for a medical device (a speculum), not a study with a test set of data in the context of AI or data analysis. The "data provenance" mentioned is the pre-existing clinical use of a predicate device (Galenica, since 1984) and the Medscand device itself in Europe (since 1993).
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience)
Not applicable. This is not an AI or diagnostic study. Ground truth in this context would likely refer to the established safety and effectiveness of the predicate device based on its long-term clinical use and regulatory clearance, rather than expert consensus on a test set.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
Not applicable. No adjudication method for a test set is mentioned.
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 is not an AI-assisted device, nor does the document describe an MRMC study.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done
Not applicable. This is a physical medical device, not an algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert concensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)
The "ground truth" implicitly relied upon for substantial equivalence is the established safety and effectiveness of the legally marketed predicate device (Galenica disposable vaginal speculum), based on its 14 years of clinical use at the time of submission (since 1984). The Medscand device's 5 years of clinical use in Europe (since 1993) also supports this.
8. The sample size for the training set
Not applicable. This is a physical medical device, not an AI model.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
Not applicable. This is a physical medical device, not an AI model.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1