HUDSON BITE-GARD ORAL BITE BLOCK,INTL
Report
- Report Number
- 3004365956-2015-00277
- Event Type
- Malfunction
- Date Received
- September 9, 2015
- Date of Event
- August 18, 2015
- Report Date
- August 19, 2015
- Manufacturer
- TELEFLEX MEDICAL
- Product Code
- JXL
- Product Problem
- Yes
- Report Source
- Manufacturer report
- Reporter Location
- UK
- Reporter Occupation
- OTHER
Narratives
(B)(4). THE DEVICE SAMPLE WAS RECEIVED BY THE MANUFACTURER, BUT THE INVESTIGATION IS INCOMPLETE AT THE TIME OF THIS REPORT. TWO PICTURES OF CATALOG NUMBER 41140 (BITE-GARD ORAL BITE BLOCK, INTL) WERE RECEIVED FOR ANALYSIS. DURING THE VISUAL INSPECTION IT CAN BE OBSERVED THE COMPONENT PART NUMBER 10752 HANDLE, ORAL BITE BLOCK IS DETACHED FROM COMPONENT PART NUMBER 10707 BITE BLOCK, LARGE. NO OTHER ISSUES WERE FOUND. THE DEVICE HISTORY RECORD REVIEW SHOWED THAT THERE WERE NO ISSUES RELATED TO THIS COMPLAINT NEITHER ON THE PRODUCT NOR ITS COMPONENTS DURING THE MANUFACTURE OF THE MATERIAL. DURING THE VISUAL INSPECTION ON THE RECEIVED PICTURES IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE HANDLE WAS DETACHED OUT FROM THE BITE BLOCK. ALSO, IT WAS OBSERVED RESIDUES OF THE BITE BLOCK ON THE HANDLE.
(B)(4). THE SAMPLE WAS RETURNED FOR EVALUATION. A VISUAL EXAM WAS PERFORMED AND IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE BITE BLOCK WAS DAMAGED. BASED ON THE VISUAL EXAM, THE REPORTED COMPLAINT IS CONFIRMED. THE DEVICE HISTORY RECORD OF BATCH NUMBER 74E1400379 HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND NO ISSUES OR DISCREPANCIES WERE FOUND WHICH COULD BE POTENTIALLY RELATED TO THE COMPLAINT. NO NON-CONFORMANCE REPORTS WERE ORIGINATED FOR THE LOT IN QUESTION. DHR SHOWS THAT THE PRODUCT WAS ASSEMBLED AND INSPECTED ACCORDING TO SPECIFICATIONS. THE LAST DHR OF COMPONENT (B)(4) WAS REVIEWED TO VERIFY THE PROCESS PARAMETERS AND USED MATERIAL AND NO ISSUES OR DISCREPANCIES WERE FOUND WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY RELATE TO THIS ISSUE. NO CORRECTIVE ACTION CAN BE IMPLEMENTED SINCE THE FAILURE MODE IS NOT RELATED TO THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS OF THE PRODUCT. A CONCLUSION CODE COULD NOT BE FOUND AS THE COMPLAINT WAS CONFIRMED; HOWEVER, A ROOT CAUSE WAS NOT ESTABLISHED.
THE CUSTOMER ALLEGES THAT THE BITE BLOCK WAS PLACED IN THE PATIENT'S MOUTH DUE TO THE PATIENT BITING THE ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE. SOON AFTER PLACEMENT, THE BITE BLOCK COMPLETELY FELL APART AND THE PATIENT HAD BITTEN THROUGH THE MAIN BODY OF THE BITE BLOCK. ALL PARTS WERE REMOVED FROM THE PATIENT'S MOUTH. THE PATIENT'S CONDITION IS REPORTED AS FINE.
THE CUSTOMER ALLEGES THAT THE BITE BLOCK WAS PLACED IN THE PATIENT'S MOUTH DUE TO THE PATIENT BITING THE ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE. SOON AFTER PLACEMENT, THE BITE BLOCK COMPLETELY FELL APART AND THE PATIENT HAD BITTEN THROUGH THE MAIN BODY OF THE BITE BLOCK. ALL PARTS WERE REMOVED FROM THE PATIENT'S MOUTH. THE PATIENT'S CONDITION IS REPORTED AS FINE.
Devices
| Seq | Brand | Generic | Product Code | Manufacturer | Model | Lot | UDI-DI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 596630 | HUDSON BITE-GARD ORAL BITE BLOCK,INTL | BITE BLOCK | JXL | TELEFLEX MEDICAL | 74E1400379 |
Patients
| Seq | Age | Sex | Outcome | Treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |