CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gilron, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gilron, I.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 40, 987-992, Copyright © 1993 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

Anaesthesia equipment safety in Canada: the role of government regulation

I Gilron
Department of Anaesthesia, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec.

Medical device problems as detected by the Health Protection Branch (HPB) of Health and Welfare Canada were studied in order to examine the frequency and safety priority of problems in the subgroup of anaesthesia devices. Data pertaining to the time period from April 1, 1987 to November 30, 1992 were gathered from the Medical Devices Notification Database and the DAFFY Reporting System. The Medical Devices Notification Database contains all notifications for newly marketed medical devices in Canada and the DAFFY Reporting System keeps record of all submitted problem reports and manufacturer recalls along with their designated safety priority status. When an important safety hazard is associated with a medical device as determined from information submitted to HPB, an Alert-Medical Devices may be issued to inform hospitals and health care professionals of the problem. During the studied time period, the percentages of problem reports and recalls as well as Alerts were compared with the percentage of newly marketed anaesthesia devices. It was found that although only 2.3% of the newly marketed medical devices were classified as anaesthesia devices, 8.6% of all problem reports/recalls and 37.5% of all Alerts originated from the field of anaesthesia devices. Comparison of the percentages of problem reports/recalls (8.6%) and Alerts (37.5%) with the percentage of marketed devices for anaesthesia (2.3%) showed differences (P < 0.05). As well, the percentage of class I priority (the highest safety priority) problem reports/recalls for anaesthesia devices was 10.2% compared with 4.9% for non-anaesthesia devices (P < 0.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
S. Fasting and S. E. Gisvold
Equipment problems during anaesthesia--are they a quality problem?
Br. J. Anaesth., December 1, 2002; 89(6): 825 - 831.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
L. Beydon, F. Conreux, R. Le Gall, D. Safran, and J. B. Cazalaa
Analysis of the French health ministry's national register of incidents involving medical devices in anaesthesia and intensive care
Br. J. Anaesth., March 1, 2001; 86(3): 382 - 387.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.