Search Results

Powder-Free Vinyl Exam Gloves, clear is a disposable device intended for medical purposes that is worn on the examiner's hand to prevent contamination between patient and examiner.

The subject device is a powder free vinyl patient examination glove, provided as non-sterile and disposable device. It is provided with clear color. Available in four sizes small, medium, large, and extra - large users can choose the most suitable option.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter and summary describe the regulatory approval process for "Powder-Free Vinyl Exam Gloves, clear." This is a Class I medical device, and the clearance is based on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, K220469, "Disposable Vinyl Examination Glove."

The study described is not a clinical study involving human patients or complex AI algorithms necessitating multi-reader, multi-case (MRMC) studies or expert adjudication of medical images. Instead, it's a non-clinical performance study focused on the physical, chemical, and biological properties of the gloves.

Therefore, many of the requested points related to AI performance, human reader improvement, and complex ground truth establishment for medical diagnosis are not applicable to this type of device and study.

Here's the breakdown of the information that is applicable:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance for Powder-Free Vinyl Exam Gloves, Clear

The acceptance criteria and device performance are primarily based on non-clinical testing according to recognized industry standards (ASTM and ISO). The goal is to demonstrate that the subject device meets the same performance specifications as the predicate device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Sample Size: The document does not specify a precise numerical sample size (e.g., number of gloves) for each non-clinical test. However, it indicates that testing was performed according to the specified ASTM and ISO standards, which inherently define the necessary sample sizes and methodologies for ensuring statistical validity within their respective contexts (e.g., AQL for the water leak test).
• Data Provenance: The document does not explicitly state the country of origin for the data. Given the "Basic Medical Technology Inc." is located in Ontario, CA (presumably California, USA) and the predicate device manufacturer is a Chinese company (CHIFENG HUAWEI MEDICAL SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.), the testing could have been performed either in the US, China, or accredited labs elsewhere.
• Retrospective or Prospective: This testing is inherently prospective as it involves the manufacturing and testing of new device samples to demonstrate compliance with standards.

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

• Not Applicable: For this type of non-clinical device (medical gloves), "ground truth" is not established by medical experts interpreting images or clinical data. Instead, it's established by the physical and chemical properties of the material as measured by standardized laboratory methods. The "experts" would be the accredited laboratory personnel performing the tests according to the ASTM and ISO standards, not medical professionals like radiologists.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not Applicable: Adjudication methods (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) are used for resolving discrepancies in expert interpretations of complex data (like medical images). This is a physical product testing scenario where results are quantitative measurements against objective criteria, so no adjudication by multiple human observers is required.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

• Not Applicable: An MRMC study is relevant for evaluating the impact of AI algorithms on human reader performance in tasks like diagnostic imaging. This device is a pair of medical gloves; there is no AI component or human reader interpretation task involved.

6. Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Study

• Not Applicable: This pertains to AI algorithm performance evaluation. There is no AI algorithm in "Powder-Free Vinyl Exam Gloves, clear." The "standalone" performance here refers to the device's physical and biological properties.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• The "ground truth" for this device is based on objective, standardized measurements of its physical properties (e.g., dimensions, tensile strength, elongation, hole detection) and biological compatibility (e.g., cytotoxicity, irritation, sensitization), as defined by internationally recognized ASTM and ISO standards. It is not based on expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data in the clinical sense.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not Applicable: This is not an AI/machine learning device. Therefore, there is no "training set" in the context of an algorithm. The manufacturing process of the gloves would have its own quality control and process validation, which might involve data collection analogous to a training set for process refinement, but this is distinct from AI model training.

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

• Not Applicable: As there is no AI training set, this question is irrelevant.

Ask a specific question about this device