Search Results
Found 1 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(59 days)
The CO2 Mainstream Module is intended to provide carbon dioxide monitoring system during anesthesia/recovery in Emergency Medicine/Transport or Respiratory care.
The CO2 Mainstream module is a non-dispersive infrared gas analyzer with an auto-zero adjustment systemand gain control. The operation of the CO2 Mainstream module is based on CO2 energy absorption rates. CO2 molecules absorb infrared light energy of specific wavelengths, with the amount of energy absorbed being directly related to the CO2 concentration. When an IR light beam is passed through a gas sample containing CO2, the electronic signal from the infrared sensor (which measures the remaining light energy), can be obtained. This signal is then compared to theenergy of the IR source, and calibrated to reflect CO2 concentration in the sample accurately. Calibration is performed using the infrared sensor's response to a known concentration of CO2 stored in the module's memory. The circuit module retains the atmospheric absolute pressure sensors and control of the pressure sensor. Modules can measure atmospheric pressure, and atmospheric can compensate the calculation for the concentrations of carbon dioxide, which improves the design accuracy. The module then determines CO2 concentration in the breathing gases by measuring the amount of light absorbed by these gases. EtCO2 displays a numerical value in millimeters of mercury (mmHg), percent(%), or kilopascals (kPa). In addition, a CO2 waveform (Capnogram) may be displayed, which is a valuable clinical tool that can be used to assess patient airway integrity and proper endotracheal tube placement. Respiration rate is calculated by measuring the time interval between detected breaths.
Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and study for the Unimed CO2 Mainstream Module:
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
The provided document describes acceptance criteria in the context of "EtCO2 Accuracy" and "Respiration Rate Accuracy." It also states that the device complies with ISO 80601-2-55. The table below combines the reported performance with these accuracy criteria.
| Metric | Acceptance Criteria (Specified in the text as EtCO2 Accuracy / Respiration Rate Accuracy) | Reported Device Performance (Implied by the criteria, stated as matching the predicate) |
|---|---|---|
| EtCO2 Accuracy (at 760 mmHg, ambient temperature of 25°C) | 0 | 0 |
| Respiration Rate Accuracy | ±1% of reading or ±1 breaths/min, whichever is greater | ±1% of reading or ±1 breaths/min, whichever is greater |
| CO2 Response Time | <70 ms | <70 ms |
| CO2 Measurement Range | 0-150 mmHg, 0-19.7%, 0-20 kPa | 0-150 mmHg, 0-19.7%, 0-20 kPa |
| Respiration Rate Measure Range | 3 - 150 breaths/minute (RPM) | 3 - 150 breaths/minute (RPM) |
| Performance Standards Compliance | ISO 80601-2-55 | Complies with ISO 80601-2-55 |
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
The document mentions "Bench testing for Inspired CO2 range and accuracy, and Respiration rate range and accuracy in accordance to ISO 80601-2-55". However, it does not specify the sample size used for this bench testing. The data provenance is not explicitly stated in terms of country of origin or whether it was retrospective or prospective, beyond stating it was "Bench testing."
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)
This information is not provided in the document. The testing described is bench testing, which typically uses calibrated equipment and reference gases as ground truth, not human experts for interpretation.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
This information is not applicable and therefore not provided, as the study involves bench testing against defined standards and reference measurements, not human adjudication of diagnostic outcomes.
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
There is no MRMC comparative effectiveness study mentioned in the document. The device is a CO2 mainstream module, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for human readers.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
The entire performance evaluation described is essentially a standalone (algorithm/device only) performance assessment, as it focuses on the accuracy of the device's measurements against established benchmarks and standards. However, the term "standalone" is often used in the context of AI algorithms. Here, it refers to the direct measurement capabilities of the hardware device, without human intervention in its measurement process.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)
The ground truth for the performance testing (EtCO2 accuracy, Respiration Rate accuracy) is established by calibrated reference gases and instrumentation that provide known concentrations of CO2 and controlled respiratory rates for bench testing, in accordance with ISO 80601-2-55.
8. The sample size for the training set
The document does not mention a training set. This device is a hardware CO2 measurement module, not an AI model that requires a training set. Its operational principles are based on non-dispersive infrared gas analysis and calibration to known CO2 concentrations.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
Since there is no training set for this type of device, this question is not applicable. The device's internal calibration in the manufacturing process would rely on highly accurate reference gases and equipment.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1