3.8 Proceedings Paper

Design Approach of Medical Devices for Regulation Compatibility: A Robotic Rehabilitation Case Study

出版社

SCITEPRESS
DOI: 10.5220/0010402801460153

关键词

Design Process; Bio-Medical Devices; MEDDEV; Regulations; CE Mark; Robotic Rehabilitation; Design Requirements; Bio-Compatible Materials; Selection Criteria

资金

  1. Regione Lombardia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Regulations and normative framework greatly influence the requirements and potential design constraints of devices, especially in critical environments like the medical field. This paper presents a design approach suitable for robotic rehabilitation systems aimed at easing regulations compatibility, emphasizing the importance of designers' understanding of the compound information net generated by required documentation.
Regulations and normative framework strongly affect requirements and potential design constraints of devices, especially in critical environments like the medical field, characterized by a complex interaction among design, therapy procedures and user needs. In order to optimize the design process, the awareness of the designer about the compound information net generated by the required documentation becomes therefore fundamental. Depicting a custom mapping of required data and referring documents for the development and commercialization of a medical device as required by the Conformite Europeenne (CE) marking process, this paper presents a design approach directly suitable for robotic rehabilitation systems, which aims at easing the regulations compatibility of the designed product. This method is applied to the illustrative case study of the LEPRE (LEg Programmable REhabilitation) robotic system, with particular attention to data collection and analysis for the evaluation of clinical background and demonstration of equivalence required by the device clinical evaluation report, according to MEDical DEVices (MEDDEV) 2.7/1 guidelines. Indications for the modifications required to adapt it to further application fields are also suggested.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据