160 likes | 257 Views
FDASIA Regulations Subcommittee. May 22, 2013. Agenda. 4:00 p.m. Call to Order – MacKenzie Robertson Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology 4:05 p.m. Opening Remarks – Brad Thompson and Julian Goldman, Co-Chairs 4:10 p.m. Discussion
E N D
FDASIA Regulations Subcommittee May 22, 2013
Agenda • 4:00 p.m. Call to Order – MacKenzie Robertson Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology • 4:05 p.m. Opening Remarks – Brad Thompson and Julian Goldman, Co-Chairs • 4:10 p.m. Discussion -Background on the task before the subgroup - Staying coordinated with the other two subgroups - Work already done by other organizations - Getting started on the questions presented • 5:25 p.m. Public Comment • 5:30 p.m. Closing Remarks; Adjourn
Background The committee is charged with identifying the following: • Current areas of regulatory duplication, ambiguity, or oversight confusion. • Current areas of regulatory success and “best practices.” • Regulatory gaps in relation to identified patient safety and innovation needs. • Relative strengths and weaknesses of our current regulatory structure as it relates to health it and patient safety. • Strategies to improve efficiency and avoid duplicative regulatory processes. • Non-regulatory activities (existing or potential) that should be considered. Is there anything else we ought to be considering?
Which laws and regulations are relevant? Three primary areas: • FCC • FDA • ONC
Which laws and regulations are relevant? But when it comes to considering issues of duplication, we have a wider focus: • HIPAA—privacy and security • Federal Trade Commission • Private standards and certification organizations • Laws governing marketing of regulated articles to HCPs • Transparency requirements in relationships with HCPs • State consumer laws • State regulation of medical devices • State product liability • State boards of medicine and pharmacy
In each regulatory area, we will focus on: • Scope questions. • What gets regulated, and • What falls within scope but isn’t actively regulated • To what degree is it regulated? • For example, FDA has three classifications • Lifecycle regulation • What are the requirements • Premarket • Manufacturing • Promotion • Post Market Reporting • Remediation
Strawman Patient safety risk assessment framework From the subcommittee call on Monday, May 20 Now Outdated
STRAWMAN Dimensions of Patient-Safety Risks • Purpose-user • Intended purpose of software • Intended user • Characterizing patient-harm risk • Magnitude of risk • Likelihood of risk situation arising • Ability to mitigate risk • Complexity of development, implementation, use • Post-marketing changes • Customizability of software • Integration with other system components • Wireless connectivity
Strawman innovation risk assessment framework Also outdated
Input needed from taxonomy subcommittee To get to a meaningful level, we will have to determine whether such areas as the following are within scope: • UDI • CPOE • MDDS • Mobile apps that act as accessories to medical devices (e.g. companion software for blood glucose meter) • Mobile apps that transform a cell phone into a medical device (e.g. electronic stethoscope) • CDS • EHR • Hospital IT networks of interoperable medical devices • What else?
We stand on whose shoulders? • Report of the Bipartisan Policy Center: An Oversight Framework for Assuring Patient Safety in Health Information Technology (2013) • A Call for Clarity: Open Questions on the Scope of FDA Regulation of mHealth: A whitepaper prepared by the mHealth Regulatory Coalition (2010), and subsequent policy papers, including mhealth use cases • CDS Coalition analysis of the factors that cause a user to be substantially dependent on software (2013) • Institute of Medicine (IOM) Report “Health IT and Patient Safety: Building Safer Systems for Better Care” • S. Hoffman, “Finding a Cure: The Case for Regulation and Oversight of Electronic Health Record Systems,” 22 Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 103 (2008).
We stand on whose shoulders? • A. Krouse, “iPads, iPhones, Androids, and Smartphones: FDA Regulation of Mobile Phone Applications as Medical Devices,” 9 Indiana Health Law Review, 731 (2012) • Proceedings of joint meeting of FDA, Center for Integration of Medicine and Innovative Technology and the Continua Health Alliance, on Medical Device Interoperability: Achieving Safety And Effectiveness 2010 • Comments submitted to the International Medical Device Regulators Forum (IMDRF) on the Standalone Software Work Item by groups such as the mHealth Regulatory Coalition -- European Union working group. • What else?
Discussion questions • Identifying non-regulatory activities (existing or potential) that should be considered? • Identifying current areas of regulatory success and “best practices.” These are things we want to preserve or even expand. • Identifying relative strengths and weaknesses of our current regulatory structure as it relates to Health IT and patient safety.