CIMIT, Center for the Integration of Medicine and Innovative Technology

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING


February 2009 Regulatory Affairs Monthly Topic

FDA Working to Devise Unique Identifier System for Devices

The requirement that individual medical devices be followed throughout the product lifecycle is attracting attention from both the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) and device industry stakeholders.  As part of the FDA Amendments Act of 2007 (“FDAAA”), FDA was granted authority to implement regulations requiring medical devices to display a unique identifier.  This authority was comparable to existing FDA regulations that require unique identifiers on drug and biologic products.  Devices were not part of the 2004 regulation that imposed these requirements, reflecting in part that devices lacked a standard national coding system comparable to the bar code that has been established for drugs.(1)(2)  While FDAAA does not mandate a specific type of device identifier, it does specify that a unique device identifier (“UDI”) must be placed on the device label, unless an alternative location is specified, or unless FDA has exempted the device or group of devices from the UDI system.(3)  The UDI must adequately identify the device throughout its distribution and use, and may need to include information such as the lot or serial number, if required by FDA. 

FDAAA’s UDI requirements came in response to pressure from Congress and other stakeholders, who had long advocated a universal UDI system.(4)  These supporters argue that unique identifiers enhance patient safety and reduce medical errors, and maintain that UDIs could improve device recalls, adverse event reporting, and post-marketing surveillance.(5)  Opponents, however, have consistently expressed concern that mandatory UDIs will increase costs without evidence of enhanced safety.(6)

While moving toward widespread use of unique device identifiers is a somewhat recent development, FDA has long had the authority to order manufacturers to track certain types of devices throughout their life cycle and use.(7)  Under this authority, FDA has required firms to track a number of higher risk devices, including prosthetic heart valves, silicone breast implants, and implantable infusion pumps.(8)  However, because FDA has not mandated a specific tracking method, manufacturers have had the freedom to select a tracking method on a product by product basis.(9)  These tracking methods have included such innovative approaches as radiofrequency tags, which are one of the types of UDIs currently under consideration for FDA’s UDI system.(10)

Apart from FDA’s requirements, many hospitals and health systems have adopted internal policies that require device manufacturers that contract with the hospitals to provide unique identifiers on their products.(11)  As a result, some medical device firms already have adopted international supply chain standards promulgated by global standards organizations such as GS1 and the Health Industry Business Communications Council, which require the use of unique numbers or bar codes to identify devices and their location throughout packaging and use.(12)
 
FDAAA directs FDA to implement the UDI program through the formal rulemaking process.  As part of this process, FDA held a public workshop on February 12, 2009, to explore UDI issues.  At the workshop, FDA outlined the key steps in creating the UDI system:  1. developing standardized UDIs; 2. determining placement and technology of UDIs; 3. creation and maintenance of a UDI database; and 4. implementation/adoption of UDIs by relevant stakeholders.(13)  Additionally, FDA sought industry input regarding what information to include in a UDI, which devices to exempt from the requirement, and how to address reprocessed, single-use devices.(14)  Industry representatives urged the agency to initially focus on higher–risk devices, suggesting that UDI solutions and requirements should vary according to the type of product.

FDA intends to issue a proposed rule on the UDI system by the end of 2009.  Interested parties can submit written comments at www.regulations.gov until February 27, 2009.  More information regarding the workshop is available at http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/meetings/021209workshop/.


(1) The Gray Sheet, Lawmakers Urge FDA to Require Unique Identification, May 14, 2007; The Gray Sheet, FDA and CMS Push, but Questions Linger Over Unique Device Identifiers, Oct. 30, 2006.

(2) The Gray Sheet, Lawmakers Urge FDA to Require Unique Identification, May 14, 2007.

(3) FDA Unique Device Identification Public Workshop: February 12, 2009, available at: http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/ocd/udi/.

(4) Health News Daily, Hospital Groups Urge FDA to Move Quickly on Device ID Rule, April 14, 2008.

(5) The Gray Sheet, Lawmakers Urge FDA to Require Unique Identification, May 14, 2007; The Gray Sheet, Premier Hospital Group Will Require Standard Device Identification, July 28, 2008.

(6) The Gray Sheet, Lawmakers Urge FDA to Require Unique Identification, May 14, 2007.

(7) See 21 U.S.C. 360i(e). 

(8) See 21 C.F.R. § 821; FDA, Medical Device Tracking: Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff, Aug. 15, 2008.

(9) FDA, Medical Device Tracking: Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff, Aug. 15, 2008.

(10) The Gray Sheet, RFID Tags Create Risks for Critical Care Equipment—Dutch Study, June 30, 2008; The Gray Sheet, Radio Interference?  FDA Studies Potential RFID Impact on Implantables, March 24, 2008; The Gray Sheet, Will UDI Require RFID?, March 24, 2008.

(11) The Gray Sheet, Premier Hospital Group Will Require Standard Device Identification, July 28, 2008; Health News Daily, Hospital Groups Urge FDA to Move Quickly on Device ID Rule, April 14, 2008.

(12) The Gray Sheet, Premier Hospital Group Will Require Standard Device Identification, July 28, 2008.

(13) FDA Unique Device Identification Public Workshop: February 12, 2009, Welcome and Introduction Presentation, Jay Crowley, available at: http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/meetings/021209workshop/presentation-crowley.html.

(14) The Gray Sheet, Industry Groups Say Unique Device ID Requirements Should be Risk-Based, Feb. 16, 2009.


Copyright © 2011 CIMIT. All rights reserved.