Search Results

The Aerotel MPM SYSTEM is indicated when patients use with home patient monitoring devices (blood pressure, digital scale, blood glucose level, respiratory peak flow, pulse oximetry) and wish to send the measured data to a central station via modem by telephone, where reports can be generated for the physician and reports can be received over the Internet by physicians and patients.

The system comprises a modem-like device that connects to various cleared measurement devices and a central station program that keeps the records of the patients, and makes the reports available ... the internet.

The Aerotel Medical Systems (1998) Ltd. MPM System functions as a device simplifying the transmission of patient health data from home monitoring devices to a central station for review by physicians and patients.

Here's an analysis of the provided text in relation to acceptance criteria and supporting studies:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The provided document does not explicitly state specific acceptance criteria in terms of numerical performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, error rates for data transmission). Instead, the acceptance is based on the system's ability to satisfactorily pass internal tests and its equivalence to predicate devices.

2. Sample Size for Test Set and Data Provenance

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not mentioned. The document states, "The system has been tested with all of the compatible measuring units," but doesn't specify how many tests were run, the number of data points, or the number of patients/users involved in these "non-clinical tests."
• Data Provenance: The tests are described as "Non-clinical tests," implying laboratory or internal testing rather than real-world patient data. There is no information regarding the country of origin of this data, but given the company's location in Israel and the regulatory submission to the FDA in the US, it's likely conducted internally without external patient data. The study is retrospective in the sense that completed tests were reviewed for the submission.

3. Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth

• Number of Experts: Not mentioned.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not mentioned. The "satisfactorily passed the tests" statement implies internal review by the company's technical personnel, but no specifics are provided.

4. Adjudication Method for Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not mentioned. The nature of the non-clinical tests suggests internal validation against pre-defined functional specifications rather than an external human adjudication process.

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

• MRMC Study: No, a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. The submission explicitly states, "Clinical tests are not necessary because the device does not use new technology." The device's primary function is data transmission, not diagnostic interpretation by human readers. Therefore, an MRMC study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance is not applicable to this device's intended use according to the submission.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance

• Standalone Performance: Yes, the described "Non-clinical tests" and "software... extensively validated" can be considered a form of standalone performance evaluation for the system's data transmission and processing functions. The device is intended to operate automatically in transmitting data. However, specific metrics (e.g., data transmission error rates, uptime) are not provided, only the general statement that it "satisfactorily passed the tests."

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• Type of Ground Truth: The ground truth for the non-clinical tests would likely be functional specifications and expected data output. For example, if a blood pressure reading of "120/80" was input from a compatible device, the ground truth would be that the system should accurately transmit and present "120/80" at the central station without corruption or error. There would be no "expert consensus," "pathology," or "outcomes data" in the traditional medical sense, as this device's role is data conduit.

8. Sample Size for Training Set

• Sample Size for Training Set: Not applicable. The MPM System, as described, is a data transmission system and not an AI/machine learning device that 'learns' from a training set of data to make predictions or classifications. Therefore, the concept of a "training set" in the context of AI development is not relevant here.

9. How Ground Truth for Training Set Was Established

• How Ground Truth for Training Set Was Established: Not applicable, as there is no training set for an AI/machine learning model.

Ask a specific question about this device