A FRAMEWORK FOR RISK CATEGORISATION AND CORRESPONDING CONTROLS FOR SaMD

Similar documents
NCRIS Capability 5.7: Population Health and Clinical Data Linkage

Response to the Western Australian Government Sustainable Health Review

MedTech Europe position on future EU cooperation on Health Technology Assessment (21 March 2017)

An interpretation of NHS England s Primary Care Co-commissioning: Regional Roadshows questions and answers Rachel Lea, Beds & Herts LMC Ltd

Convergence and Differentiation within the Framework of European Scientific and Technical Cooperation on HTA

NHS Next Stage Review: Innovation

Medical Technology Association of NZ. Proposed European Union/New Zealand Free Trade Agreement. Submission to Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade

Software as a Medical Device (SaMD)

ABHI Response to the Kennedy short study on Valuing Innovation

SHTG primary submission process

Empowering young people. headspace Strategic Plan

Medical Devices cyber risks and threats

TGA Discussion Paper 3D Printing Technology in the Medical Device Field Australian Regulatory Considerations

Australia/Taiwan Electronics and ICT Industry Strategic Framework Agreement (ATSFA) Creating New Industries Together

Vice Chancellor s introduction

Our position. ICDPPC declaration on ethics and data protection in artificial intelligence

Parenteral Nutrition Down Under Inc. (PNDU) Working with Pharmaceutical Companies Policy (Policy)

Advancing Health and Prosperity. A Brief to the Advisory Panel on Healthcare Innovation

The Value of Membership.

EMA Technical Anonymisation Group (TAG)

The UNISDR Global Science & Technology Advisory Group for the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction UNISDR

clarification to bring legal certainty to these issues have been voiced in various position papers and statements.

Amaze AGM 2017 Non Executive Director Positions

Centre for Healthcare Technologies

Technology and Innovation in the NHS Scottish Health Innovations Ltd

Hong Kong Personal Data Protection Regulatory Framework From Compliance to Accountability

The Maxwell Centre. Richard Friend, David Peet and Malcolm Longair

Submission to the Productivity Commission inquiry into Intellectual Property Arrangements

NHS SOUTH NORFOLK CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY

g~:~: P Holdren ~\k, rjj/1~

Ai Group Submission. in response to the REVIEW OF ELECTRICITY (CONSUMER SAFETY) ACT 2004 ISSUES PAPER

Military Robotics - Emerging Trends and Future Outlook. Reference code: DF4580PR Published: July 2015 Single user price: US$1950

RBI Working Group report on FinTech: Key themes

TRANSLATING RESEARCH INTO PRODUCTIVITY: RETHINKING LINKAGES

Digital Preservation Strategy Implementation roadmaps

December Eucomed HTA Position Paper UK support from ABHI

An Essential Health and Biomedical R&D Treaty

Section 1: Internet Governance Principles

Summary Remarks By David A. Olive. WITSA Public Policy Chairman. November 3, 2009

Technology Platforms: champions to leverage knowledge for growth

Health Information Technology Standards. Series Editor: Tim Benson

25 th Workshop of the EURORDIS Round Table of Companies (ERTC)

Consumer and Community Participation Policy

Andalusian Agency for Health Technology Assessment (AETSA)

REPORT ON THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE MEMORY OF THE WORLD IN THE DIGITAL AGE: DIGITIZATION AND PRESERVATION OUTLINE

Ambition & opportunity The library and information profession and where we go from here

APEC Internet and Digital Economy Roadmap

RECOMMENDATIONS. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2018/790 of 25 April 2018 on access to and preservation of scientific information

AS/NZS :2014

SMA Europe Code of Practice on Relationships with the Pharmaceutical Industry

GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION ON THE OBJECTIVES OF THE NATIONAL INFORMATION SOCIETY POLICY FOR

HTA Position Paper. The International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) defines HTA as:

Professor Ashley Goldsworthy AO OBE FTSE FCIE Executive Director

Brief to the. Senate Standing Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. Dr. Eliot A. Phillipson President and CEO

2nd Call for Proposals

Second Annual Forum on Science, Technology and Innovation for the Sustainable Development Goals

the royal society of new zealand: gateway to science and technology strategic priorities

Roadmap for European Universities in Energy December 2016

Standard of Knowledge, Skill and Competence for Practice as an Architectural Technologist

NO MORE MUDDLING THROUGH

Mining Innovation: The Importance of Science Entreprise

Quality Management and Managerialism in Healthcare

CAPACITIES. 7FRDP Specific Programme ECTRI INPUT. 14 June REPORT ECTRI number

NEMA XR X-ray Equipment for Interventional Procedures User Quality Control Mode

March 27, The Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) appreciates this opportunity

Parkinson s World A transformational project by The Cure Parkinson s Trust

GPC update on co-commissioning of primary care: Important Guidance for CCG member practices and LMCs

LSCB Pan-Lancashire LSCB Online Safeguarding Strategy

Session 1, Part 2: Emerging issues in e-commerce Australian experiences of privacy and consumer protection regulation

A Science & Innovation Audit for the West Midlands

RESEARCH AND INNOVATION STRATEGY. ANZPAA National Institute of Forensic Science

Digital Identity Innovation Canada s Opportunity to Lead the World. Digital ID and Authentication Council of Canada Pre-Budget Submission

Written Submission for the Pre-Budget Consultations in Advance of the 2019 Budget By: The Danish Life Sciences Forum

How Explainability is Driving the Future of Artificial Intelligence. A Kyndi White Paper

Intellectual Property

WHO Regulatory Systems Strengthening Program

Information & Communication Technology Strategy

OECD Innovation Strategy: Key Findings

This document is a preview generated by EVS

CEN / CENELEC Joint Task Force, Software as Medical Devices: Current Status

MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY REGULATION. Understanding Where We Have Been and Where We Are Going with Harmonization

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO THE REPORT BY THE MUSEUMS THINK TANK

Towards a high-quality Baukultur for Europe

Global Perspectives on Clinical Engineering Trends Yadin David, Ed.D., P.E., C.C.E., FAACE, FAIMBE

Satellite Environmental Information and Development Aid: An Analysis of Longer- Term Prospects

OECD-INADEM Workshop on

Software & Simulation

Technology Leadership Course Descriptions

Global Harmonization Task Force

Open Science for the 21 st century. A declaration of ALL European Academies

Security services play a key role in digital transformation for higher education

Engaging UK Climate Service Providers a series of workshops in November 2014

IEEE IoT Vertical and Topical Summit - Anchorage September 18th-20th, 2017 Anchorage, Alaska. Call for Participation and Proposals

The 26 th APEC Economic Leaders Meeting

Disclosure Initiative Principles of Disclosure

University of Massachusetts Amherst Libraries. Digital Preservation Policy, Version 1.3

AS/NZS :2017. Electrical installations Selection of cables AS/NZS :2017

AS/NZS ISO 9000:2016. Quality management systems Fundamentals and vocabulary AS/NZS ISO 9000:2016. Australian/New Zealand Standard

Stakeholders Acting Together On the ethical impact assessment of Research and Innovation

European Charter for Access to Research Infrastructures - DRAFT

Transcription:

A FRAMEWORK FOR RISK CATEGORISATION AND CORRESPONDING CONTROLS FOR SaMD This submission is Professionals Australia s response to the International Medical Device Regulators Forum Working Group s invitation to comment on a possible risk categorisation and control framework for software as a medical device (SaMD) May 2014

About Professionals Australia Professionals Australia is an organisation registered under the Fair Work Act 2009 representing over 25,000 Professional Engineers, Professional Scientists, Veterinarians, Architects, Pharmacists, Information Technology Professionals, Managers, Transport Industry Professionals and Translating and Interpreting Professionals throughout Australia. Professionals Australia is the only industrial association representing exclusively the industrial and professional interests of these groups. Professionals Australia promotes the views of members on a wide range of policy issues to government, industry and the community. We have three objectives: to provide a strong voice for engineering, science and technology professionals. This includes considering the kind of support, policies and practices at the enterprise and structural levels that will be necessary to create a sustainable engineering, science and technology workforce capable of realising optimal levels of innovation, productivity and competitiveness; to play a leading role in encouraging dialogue between industry, government and the higher education sector. This means advocating for investment and structural reforms, building the platforms for collaboration and change and initiating and leading projects to foster collaboration; and to promote public understanding of the key role engineering, science and technology professionals play in ensuring Australia s future. This involves influencing public policy and resource allocation decisions and promoting the value of engineering, science and technology to decision-makers and the wider community. We seek to highlight the critical role our members play in enabling productivity and innovation, promoting economic prosperity, protecting the environment, improving human welfare and quality of life and protecting national security. In doing so, we raise the status of these professions and the professionals who work in them. This Submission is made on behalf of Professionals Australia and also Professional Engineers Australia, Professional Scientists Australia and IT Professionals Australia each Divisions of the Professionals Australia. Professionals Australia GPO Box 1272, Melbourne, Vic. 3001 e: info@professionalsaustralia.org.au w: www.professionalsaustralia.org.au t: 1300 273 762 1 P a g e

Contents About Professionals Australia... 1 Foreword... 3 Comments on the proposed framework... 4 The premise of the framework... 4 Aspects of risk categorisation (technical or otherwise) and corresponding controls that may not be adequately addressed by the framework... 4 Controls that can be used to assure the quality of software produced... 4 Limitations or suggestions about the framework... 4 How the framework might affect members... 4 Summary... 5 Acknowledgement... 5 Contact us... 5 References... 5 2 P a g e

Foreword Professionals Australia acknowledges the challenges facing the IMDRF working group in developing a risk categorisation and control framework for SaMD software as medical device (supplied independently of any specific hardware). We recognise the indisputable potential for SaMD to enhance the quality of patient care by giving health care providers an enhanced ability to make well-informed clinical decisions. At the same time however, we recognise the complexity of developing a converged regulatory framework which addresses the potential public health risks posed by SaMD, the rapid evolution of mobile communications technologies and the broad range of settings both within and beyond medical institutions in which those accessing SaMD need to be aware of the quality and risk management issues. We understand that the framework must provide for determining risk levels, as well as allowing for informed decisions about tradeoffs between risks and potential rewards in both the clinical and home/patient environments. These risks range from breaches of privacy law to diminished management control in institutional clinical settings. Embracing SaMD will require organisations and the community to acknowledge a range of risks and liabilities that were either of less concern or no concern at all with software embedded in existing medical devices. It is clear that now more than ever we need to put in place appropriate regulatory controls which will protect the public from the potential risks to patient safety and public health posed by SaMD while balancing the enormous potential benefits. We thank the IMDRF working group for the opportunity to make a very brief submission to this consultation process. Chris Walton CEO, Professionals Australia 3 P a g e

Comments on the proposed framework The Submission will provide comments in the format set out in the Invitation to Comment (posted at www.tga.gov.au/newsroom/consult-oma-software-imdrf-140512.html) under the heading Content of Submissions. The premise of the framework Professionals Australia supports the premise of the framework. In our view, the rapidly developing space of SaMD requires regulatory oversight. Aspects of risk categorisation (technical or otherwise) and corresponding controls that may not be adequately addressed by the framework The content of the risk categorisation is extensive and complex. However, it would be best to use an analogous structure (and titles) to the existing classification system for medical devices, i.e. Class I - typically low risk Class IIa - typically medium risk Class IIb - typically medium risk Class III - typically high risk This will assist with the implementation of the new risk categorisation for SaMDs by providing both healthcare professionals and regulatory agencies with a more familiar framework. Controls that can be used to assure the quality of software produced Section 7 of the proposed framework 1 describes well the quality system and standards necessary to manufacture and monitor software over a product life cycle. An appendix listing software design, quality and human factor standards may be beneficial as a reference. Limitations or suggestions about the framework The regulatory oversight for SaMDs could become quite onerous considering the vast number and risk levels of SaMDs. Lower risk SaMDs may require a 'self regulation' approach, where the public is provided information from regulatory agencies of the risks surrounding SaMDs to make their own informed decisions on the quality and effectiveness of the software. How the framework might affect members Healthcare professionals such as biomedical engineers, healthcare IT professionals and clinicians need guidance from regulatory agencies and information to provide to users of SaMDs. It is necessary for both healthcare professionals and patients to be aware of the risks behind SaMDs and how to assess the quality and effectiveness of software. Information on what to avoid and who to contact for further advice will allow SaMDs to continue to develop without onerous regulatory oversight and promote 'self-regulation' by users. 4 P a g e

Summary We hope you find our input to this important consultation a useful contribution to developing a framework for risk categorisation and corresponding controls FOR SaMD. Acknowledgement Professionals Australia wishes to acknowledge the assistance of Mr. Simon Cowley in the preparation of this Submission. We also thank Katie Havelberg, Casey Moore and David Nebauer for reviewing the content. Contact us For further information, please contact: Professionals Australia GPO Box 1272, Melbourne, Vic. 3001 e: info@professionalsaustralia.org.au w: http://www.professionalsaustralia.org.au t: 1300 273 762 References 1 International Medical Device Regulators Forum (2014). Software as a Medical Device: Possible framework for risk categorization and corresponding controls, p.19. Copyright 2014 Professionals Australia All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electrical, mechanical, photocopy, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from Professionals Australia. 5 P a g e