IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v121y2017i8p880-886.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Post market surveillance in the german medical device sector – current state and future perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Zippel, Claus
  • Bohnet-Joschko, Sabine

Abstract

Medical devices play a central role in the diagnosis and treatment of diseases but also bring the potential for adverse events, hazards or malfunction with serious consequences for patients and users. Medical device manufacturers are therefore required by law to monitor the performance of medical devices that have been approved by the competent authorities (post market surveillance). Conducting a nationwide online-survey in the German medical device sector in Q2/2014 in order to explore the current status of the use of post market instruments we obtained a total of 118 complete data sets, for a return rate of 36%. The survey included manufacturers of different sizes, producing medical devices of all risk classes. The post market instruments most frequently reported covered the fields of production monitoring and quality management as well as literature observation, regulatory vigilance systems, customer knowledge management and market observation while Post Market Clinical Follow-up and health services research were being used less for product monitoring. We found significant differences between the different risk classes of medical devices produced and the intensity of use of post market instruments. Differences between company size and the intensity of instruments used were hardly detected. Results may well contribute to the development of device monitoring which is a crucial element of the policy and regulatory system to identify device-related safety issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Zippel, Claus & Bohnet-Joschko, Sabine, 2017. "Post market surveillance in the german medical device sector – current state and future perspectives," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(8), pages 880-886.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:121:y:2017:i:8:p:880-886
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.06.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851017301690
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.06.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schreyögg, Jonas & Bäumler, Michael & Busse, Reinhard, 2009. "Balancing adoption and affordability of medical devices in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(2-3), pages 218-224, October.
    2. Niederländer, Charlotte & Wahlster, Philip & Kriza, Christine & Kolominsky-Rabas, Peter, 2013. "Registries of implantable medical devices in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 20-37.
    3. Fuchs, Sabine & Olberg, Britta & Panteli, Dimitra & Perleth, Matthias & Busse, Reinhard, 2017. "HTA of medical devices: Challenges and ideas for the future from a European perspective," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 215-229.
    4. Perleth, Matthias & Busse, Reinhard & Schwartz, Friedrich Wilhelm, 1999. "Regulation of health-related technologies in Germany," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 105-126, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shatrov, Kosta & Blankart, Carl Rudolf, 2022. "After the four-year transition period: Is the European Union's Medical Device Regulation of 2017 likely to achieve its main goals?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(12), pages 1233-1240.
    2. Claus Zippel & Sabine Bohnet-Joschko, 2021. "Rise of Clinical Studies in the Field of Machine Learning: A Review of Data Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-14, May.
    3. Choi, Soo Jeong & Nam, Ki Chang & Choi, Sooin & Kim, Jin Kuk & Lee, You Kyoung & Kwon, Bum Sun, 2021. "The establishment of the Korean medical device safety information monitoring center: Reviewing ten years of experience," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(7), pages 941-946.
    4. Semjonova Nadezhda, 2020. "Economic Tendencies of the European and Latvian Medical Device Market," Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 34(1), pages 297-310, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fuchs, Sabine & Olberg, Britta & Perleth, Matthias & Busse, Reinhard & Panteli, Dimitra, 2019. "Testing a new taxonomic model for the assessment of medical devices: Is it plausible and applicable? Insights from HTA reports and interviews with HTA institutions in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 173-181.
    2. Lübbeke, A. & Silman, A.J. & Barea, C. & Prieto-Alhambra, D. & Carr, A.J., 2018. "Mapping existing hip and knee replacement registries in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(5), pages 548-557.
    3. Beck, ACC & Retèl, VP & Bhairosing, PA & van den Brekel, MWM & van Harten, WH, 2019. "Barriers and facilitators of patient access to medical devices in Europe: A systematic literature review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(12), pages 1185-1198.
    4. Martelli, Nicolas & van den Brink, Hélène, 2014. "Special funding schemes for innovative medical devices in French hospitals: The pros and cons of two different approaches," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 1-5.
    5. Maximilian H. M. Hatz & Jonas Schreyögg & Aleksandra Torbica & Giuseppe Boriani & Carl R. B. Blankart, 2017. "Adoption Decisions for Medical Devices in the Field of Cardiology: Results from a European Survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S1), pages 124-144, February.
    6. Kastanioti, Catherine & Kontodimopoulos, Nick & Stasinopoulos, Dionysis & Kapetaneas, Nikolaos & Polyzos, Nikolaos, 2013. "Public procurement of health technologies in Greece in an era of economic crisis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 7-13.
    7. Philip Klein & Hedwig Blommestein & Maiwenn Al & Benedetta Pongiglione & Aleksandra Torbica & Saskia de Groot, 2022. "Real‐world evidence in health technology assessment of high‐risk medical devices: Fit for purpose?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 10-24, September.
    8. Pedro Parreira & Liliana B. Sousa & Inês A. Marques & Paulo Santos-Costa & Sara Cortez & Filipa Carneiro & Arménio Cruz & Anabela Salgueiro-Oliveira, 2020. "Usability Assessment of an Innovative Device in Infusion Therapy: A Mix-Method Approach Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-13, November.
    9. Schreyögg, Jonas & Henke, Klaus-Dirk & Busse, Reinhard, 2004. "Managing pharmaceutical regulation in Germany: Overview and economic assessment," Discussion Papers 2004/6, Technische Universität Berlin, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Levaggi, Rosella & Moretto, Michele & Pertile, Paolo, 2014. "Two-part payments for the reimbursement of investments in health technologies," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 230-236.
    11. Rosanna Tarricone & Aleksandra Torbica & Michael Drummond, 2017. "Challenges in the Assessment of Medical Devices: The MedtecHTA Project," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S1), pages 5-12, February.
    12. Sandor Kovács & Zoltán Kaló & Rita Daubner‐Bendes & Katarzyna Kolasa & Rok Hren & Tomas Tesar & Vivian Reckers‐Droog & Werner Brouwer & Carlo Federici & Mike Drummond & Antal Tamás Zemplényi, 2022. "Implementation of coverage with evidence development schemes for medical devices: A decision tool for late technology adopter countries," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 195-206, September.
    13. Rachet-Jacquet, Laurie & Toulemon, Léa & Rochaix, Lise, 2021. "Hospital payment schemes and high-priced drugs: Evidence from the French Add-on List," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(7), pages 923-929.
    14. Deo, Sarang & Tyagi, Hanu & Chatterjee, Chirantan & Molakapuri, Himasagar, 2020. "Did India's price control policy for coronary stents create unintended consequences?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    15. Walshe, Ronald & Schmitz, Norbert & Diehl, Volker, 1999. "Can corporatization contribute to quality assurance and cost control in the German hospital sector?: A pilot project for stem cell transplantation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 207-218, August.
    16. Sorenson, Corinna & Kanavos, Panos, 2011. "Medical technology procurement in Europe: A cross-country comparison of current practice and policy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 43-50, April.
    17. Rowan Iskandar & Carlo Federici & Cassandra Berns & Carl Rudolf Blankart, 2022. "An approach to quantify parameter uncertainty in early assessment of novel health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 116-134, September.
    18. Henschke, Cornelia, 2012. "Provision and financing of assistive technology devices in Germany: A bureaucratic odyssey? The case of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and Duchenne muscular dystrophy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 176-184.
    19. Fischer, Katharina E. & Rogowski, Wolf H. & Leidl, Reiner & Stollenwerk, Björn, 2013. "Transparency vs. closed-door policy: Do process characteristics have an impact on the outcomes of coverage decisions? A statistical analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 187-196.
    20. Franz Tödtling & Tanja Sinozic & Alexander Auer, 2016. "Knowledge bases, multi-scale interaction and transformation of the Vienna medical cluster," SRE-Disc sre-disc-2016_03, Institute for Multilevel Governance and Development, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:121:y:2017:i:8:p:880-886. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.