LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement/Bi-Partisan Bill to Streamline FDA Device Inspection Process
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

Bi-Partisan Bill to Streamline FDA Device Inspection Process

March 2, 2017 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

Bi-Partisan Bill to Streamline FDA Device Inspection Process
Source: Wikimedia Commons and Julo
Secondary

The FDA inspection process for device manufacturers is getting some bi-partisan attention in Congress.

On February 15, 2017, U.S. Senators Michael Bennet, a Democrat from Colorado and Johnny Isakson, a Republican from Georgia introduced a bipartisan bill (S.404) to modernize the FDA’s medical device inspections process.

“FDA inspections are supposed to ensure that companies provide safe and reliable medical devices for patients around the world,” Bennet said. “This bill would modernize that process, streamline consistent inspections across regions, and implement recommendations more quickly.”

The legislation is called, “A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to improve the process for inspections of device establishments for granting export certifications.”

“The current device facility inspection process lacks transparency, predictability and consistency between facilities,” Isakson said. “This bill is designed to improve communication and consistency in the device facility inspections process, which will allow both FDA and device manufacturers to make more efficient use of resources.”

The Senators want to stablish a “risk-based inspections process” to make sure the frequency and nature of inspections are more consistent around the world. To do this, the bill requires enhanced communication between the FDA and companies so they may address quality and compliance issues more efficiently. The bill would also improve the process for granting export certificates to foreign countries for companies that seek to market their devices internationally.

Specifically, the bill would require FDA to notify the device maker in advance of the type and nature of the inspection, in a reasonable amount of time before the inspection takes place.

For routine inspections, the FDA would have to give device makers an estimate for how long the inspection is expected to take, and communicate daily with the company’s owners or operators. And, when possible, FDA is instructed to give device makers advanced notice of the records they will request as part of the inspection.

Advertisement

Additionally, the bill would also require the FDA to give device makers feedback on proposed actions to address issues cited in a Form 483 following an inspection within 45 days of receiving the request.

If the bill gets through Congress and is signed by President Trump, the FDA would have to issue draft guidance within a year specifying how it would implement the bill. Specifically, the draft guidance would detail standardized templates for the various communications described in the bill, establish a standard timeframe for inspections and detail a set of common set of practices for investigators.

To read the text of the legislation, click here.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy