Search Results

The sensor is indicated for use in continuous noninvasive arterial oxygen saturation and pulse rate monitoring.

Oximeter sensors are used with compatible pulse oximeters to noninvasively continually monitor oxygen saturation and pulse rate. The primary components of the sensors are light-emitting diodes (red and infrared LED) and a photosensor. These components are embedded within a taping system to wrap the sensor around a patient's finger, foot or hand so that the LED and photosensor are directly opposite each other. As light is emitted and received across the vascular bed, the rates of absorption at the two wavelengths vary depending upon the ratios of oxygenated and deoxygenated hemoglobin within the blood. The pulse oximeter detects the changes in absorption and utilizes an algorithm to calculate the corresponding pulse rate (beats/minute) and percent arterial oxygen saturation.
Vanguard receives previously used pulse oximeter sensors from healthcare facilities; cleans, reworks, (replaces the tape [all patient-contacting materials]), inspects, tests, repackages and sterilizes the devices; and returns them to a healthcare facility.

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

1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The provided text does not specify numerical acceptance criteria for performance (e.g., accuracy, precision). Instead, it states that the testing "demonstrates that the reprocessed devices perform as intended and are safe and effective." The performance is implicitly demonstrated by showing that the reprocessed sensors are "essentially identical to the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) devices" and that "No changes are made to the electro-optical components; the reprocessed sensors possess equivalent technological characteristics."

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

The document does not explicitly state the sample size used for performance testing of the reprocessed pulse oximeter sensors, nor does it specify the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective). It broadly mentions "cleaning, sterilization, and packaging validations, and performance and biocompatibility testing."

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 type of device (reprocessed pulse oximeter sensors) typically relies on measurable physical parameters rather than expert interpretation for performance evaluation.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

This information is not provided. Given the nature of pulse oximetry performance testing, adjudication methods typically seen in image or data interpretation studies (like 2+1 or 3+1 for consensus) would not be applicable.

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 is not mentioned. This type of study is typically relevant for interpretative devices (e.g., AI in radiology), not for a device like a reprocessed pulse oximeter sensor, which directly measures physiological parameters. This device does not involve AI or human interpretation in its core function.

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

This concept is not directly applicable. A pulse oximeter sensor is a hardware device for measurement. While it contains an algorithm to calculate pulse rate and SpO2 from collected data, the "standalone" performance here refers to the device's ability to accurately measure these parameters. The evaluation confirms that the reprocessed device functions equivalently to the original device, which inherently means its embedded algorithm (unchanged) performs as expected. The study likely involved comparing readings from the reprocessed sensor against a reference standard, not assessing an algorithm in isolation from the hardware.

7. The type of ground truth used

The document does not explicitly state the type of ground truth used for specific performance metrics. However, for pulse oximetry, the ground truth would typically be established by a reference method for arterial oxygen saturation and pulse rate, such as co-oximetry for SaO2 and ECG for heart rate, or tightly controlled hypoxic studies. The phrase "performance testing" implies comparison to such established standards.

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not applicable and not provided. As a reprocessed hardware device with an existing, unchanged algorithm, there is no "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI algorithm development.

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

This information is not applicable and not provided for the same reasons as point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device

The sensor is indicated for use in continuous noninvasive arterial oxygen saturation and pulse rate monitoring.

Oximeter sensors are used with compatible pulse oximeters to noninvasively continually monitor oxygen saturation and pulse rate. The primary components of the sensors are light-emitting diodes (red and infrared LED) and a photosensor. These components are embedded within a taping system to wrap the sensor around a patient's finger, foot or hand so that the LED and photosensor are directly opposite each other. As light is emitted and received across the vascular bed, the rates of absorption at the two wavelengths vary depending upon the ratios of oxygenated and deoxygenated hemoglobin within the blood. The pulse oximeter detects the changes in absorption and utilizes an algorithm to calculate the corresponding pulse rate (beats/minute) and percent arterial oxygen saturation.

Vanguard receives previously used oximeter sensors from healthcare facilities; cleans, reworks, (replaces the tape [all patient-contacting materials]), inspects, tests, repackages and sterilizes the devices; and returns them to the healthcare facility.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for Vanguard Reprocessed Pulse Oximeter Sensors. While it asserts that the reprocessed devices perform as intended and are safe and effective, it does not contain detailed acceptance criteria or a study write-up with specific performance metrics, sample sizes, or ground truth establishment methods typically found in a clinical study report.

The document is a regulatory submission for substantial equivalence based on the technological characteristics and functional testing compared to a predicate device. It indicates that "Sterilization validations, and functional/performance and biocompatibility testing demonstrates that the reprocessed devices perform as intended and are safe and effective." However, it does not elaborate on the specific methodologies or results of these tests in a way that would allow for the construction of the requested table and detailed description.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request for:

• A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: The document does not provide specific numerical acceptance criteria or performance metrics for the reprocessed pulse oximeter sensors beyond the general statement that they perform as intended and are safe and effective.
• Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance: No sample sizes for testing are mentioned.
• Number of experts used to establish the ground truth...: Not applicable as no clinical study with ground truth establishment is described.
• Adjudication method: Not applicable.
• If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done: Not applicable.
• If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done: The device is a physical sensor, not an algorithm, so this is not applicable in the way it's framed for AI/algorithm performance.
• The type of ground truth used: Not applicable.
• The sample size for the training set: Not applicable as it's not an AI/ML device requiring a training set.
• How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

The "Test Data" section merely states: "Sterilization validations, and functional/performance and biocompatibility testing demonstrates that the reprocessed devices perform as intended and are safe and effective." This is a high-level summary and does not provide the granular information needed to describe acceptance criteria or a study that proves the device meets those criteria.

Ask a specific question about this device