Managing the risks of medical technology: Do hazard surveillance systems provide an early warning of medical device problems?

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for risk assessment and risk management in the post-market surveillance of the U.S. medical device industry. One of the FDA regulatory mechanisms, the Medical Device Reporting System (MDR) is an adverse event reporting system intended to provide the FDA with advance warning of device problems. It includes voluntary reporting for individuals, and mandatory reporting for device manufacturers. ^ In a study of alleged breast implant safety problems, this research examines the organizational processes by which the FDA gathers data on adverse events and uses adverse event reporting systems to assess and manage risk. The research reviews the literature on problem recognition, risk perception, and organizational learning to understand the influence highly publicized events may have on adverse event reporting. Understanding the influence of an environmental factor, such as publicity, on adverse event reporting can provide insight into the question of whether the FDA's adverse event reporting system operates as an early warning system for medical device problems. ^ The research focuses on two main questions. The first question addresses the relationship between publicity and the voluntary and mandatory reporting of adverse events. The second question examines whether government agencies make use of these adverse event reports. ^ Using quantitative and qualitative methods, a longitudinal study was conducted of the number and content of adverse event reports regarding breast implants filed with the FDA's medical device reporting system during 1985–1991. To assess variation in publicity over time, the print media were analyzed to identify articles related to breast implant failures. ^ The exploratory findings suggest that an increase in media activity is related to an increase in voluntary reporting, especially following periods of intense media coverage of the FDA. However, a similar relationship was not found between media activity and manufacturers' mandatory adverse event reporting. A review of government committee and agency reports on the FDA published during 1976–1996 produced little evidence to suggest that publicity or MDR information contributed to problem recognition, agenda setting, or the formulation of policy recommendations. ^ The research findings suggest that the reporting of breast implant problems to FDA may reflect the perceptions and concerns of the reporting groups, a barometer of the volume and content of media attention. ^

Development of a rapid bioassessment method and index of biotic integrity for estuaries located along the northwest Gulf of Mexico

Recently it has been proposed that the evaluation of effects of pollutants on aquatic organisms can provide an early warning system of potential environmental and human health risks (NRC 1991). Unfortunately there are few methods available to aquatic biologists to conduct assessments of the effects of pollutants on aquatic animal community health. The primary goal of this research was to develop and evaluate the feasibility of such a method. Specifically, the primary objective of this study was to develop a prototype rapid bioassessment technique similar to the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) for the upper Texas and Northwestern Gulf of Mexico coastal tributaries. The IBI consists of a series of "metrics" which describes specific attributes of the aquatic community. Each of these metrics are given a score which is then subtotaled to derive a total assessment of the "health" of the aquatic community. This IBI procedure may provide an additional assessment tool for professionals in water quality management.^ The experimental design consisted primarily of compiling previously collected data from monitoring conducted by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) at five bayous classified according to potential for anthropogenic impact and salinity regime. Standardized hydrological, chemical, and biological monitoring had been conducted in each of these watersheds. The identification and evaluation of candidate metrics for inclusion in the estuarine IBI was conducted through the use of correlation analysis, cluster analysis, stepwise and normal discriminant analysis, and evaluation of cumulative distribution frequencies. Scores of each included metric were determined based on exceedances of specific percentiles. Individual scores were summed and a total IBI score and rank for the community computed.^ Results of these analyses yielded the proposed metrics and rankings listed in this report. Based on the results of this study, incorporation of an estuarine IBI method as a water quality assessment tool is warranted. Adopted metrics were correlated to seasonal trends and less so to salinity gradients observed during the study (0-25 ppt). Further refinement of this method is needed using a larger more inclusive data set which includes additional habitat types, salinity ranges, and temporal variation. ^

Continuous safety screens for randomized controlled clinical trials with blinded treatment information

Standard methods for testing safety data are needed to ensure the safe conduct of clinical trials. In particular, objective rules for reliably identifying unsafe treatments need to be put into place to help protect patients from unnecessary harm. DMCs are uniquely qualified to evaluate accumulating unblinded data and make recommendations about the continuing safe conduct of a trial. However, it is the trial leadership who must make the tough ethical decision about stopping a trial, and they could benefit from objective statistical rules that help them judge the strength of evidence contained in the blinded data. We design early stopping rules for harm that act as continuous safety screens for randomized controlled clinical trials with blinded treatment information, which could be used by anyone, including trial investigators (and trial leadership). A Bayesian framework, with emphasis on the likelihood function, is used to allow for continuous monitoring without adjusting for multiple comparisons. Close collaboration between the statistician and the clinical investigators will be needed in order to design safety screens with good operating characteristics. Though the math underlying this procedure may be computationally intensive, implementation of the statistical rules will be easy and the continuous screening provided will give suitably early warning when real problems were to emerge. Trial investigators and trial leadership need these safety screens to help them to effectively monitor the ongoing safe conduct of clinical trials with blinded data.^