[continued from previous message]
linked to the TPLC Patient Problem tabulations are extracted from FDAs MAUDE platform. Refer to the MAUDE page for significant disclaimers about MDRs @
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/search.cfm.
An MDR can be filed for a benign reasons: a chipped knob, worn package
label, or blurred device marking, etc. MDRs usually originate from patient-device interactions that may result for an EVENT TYPE: Injury, Malfunction, or Death. An EVENT TYPE for "Other" is allocated for device
EVENT TYPE that neither cause injury or death or from malfunction. MAUDE
also sponsors an EVENT TYPE for "No Answer Provided" category.
For example,
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/results.cfm?start_search=1&searchyear=&productcode=MCM&productproblem=2993&devicename=&knumber=k&pmanumber=p&manufacturer=&brandname=&eventtype=&reportdatefrom=01/1/2015&reportdateto=&pagenum=10
gives an TPLC URL that says "Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)." Accessing that link shows all (up to 500) contributing
MAUDE MDRs to the TPLC device problem category.
What did the patient experience with this device to merit an MDR submission? For an example, see
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=10609891&pc=MCM.
Observe this MDR text: Patient Problem Therapeutic Response, Decreased
(2271), and then read the Event Type (Malfunction) and Event Description.
MDRs are often, but not exclusively, written by manufacturer representatives consulting with the physician who performed the implant procedure and/or reported the patient event. MDR content can be challenging to interpret: significant medical and device subject matter expertise are often required.
Consider a consumer who might become a patient/device recipient. Before surgery, they may desire to know which device will likely yield the best outcome, and satisfy their quality of life expectations.
How can a consumer make a good choice, other than considering the price tag
of the device implant, procedure expense, convalescent period, etc. if they can't understand what the device has or hasn't achieved based on historical outcomes? There's no "Consumer Reports" article to study on cochlear or bone conduction implants.
One wonders if physicians read, or are required to read, the historical
MAUDE MDRs before deciding on what device to consider. What motivates their device selection? What weight do physicians allocate to device track record?
https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/statistics/hearing-charts-tables#hearing-aids-adults
reveals several charts on hearing impairment by population segments: loss of hearing in adults by age and gender, cochlear implants by 1,000 population
and age, etc.
Using
https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/data/Chart/4410?category=1&by=Total&fips=-1, for people aged 70+ in the calendar year 2013, the rate of cochlear implant
per 1,000 population is 323. That's ~32% of that cohort.
The US Census 2019 estimated total for persons aged 70-85+ years is
35.431M:
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/demo/tables/age-and-sex/2019/age-sex-composition/2019gender_table1.xlsx
The estimated number of cochlear implants in this cohort, using 2013 NIH implant data, is 0.323*35.431M ~= 11.44M.
SUMMARY
The tabulations indicate, given the comparatively low device problem report
and MDR densities in light of eligible recipient population, that the
devices in these product codes appear broadly successful.
Recipients that experience an unfortunate device problem may require
additional medical care to ameliorate these unfortunate outcomes. It is
these untoward and often unexpected events, though proportionately rare,
which device suppliers must minimize to reduce frequency.
DEVICE PROBLEM AND PATIENT PROBLEM TABULATIONS
For product code MCM, from 01JAN2015 to 30SEP2020
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfTPLC/tplc.cfm?id=1694&min_report_year=2015,
the Top-10 TPLC Device Problems (in CSV format):
Device Problems,MDRs with this Device Problem,Events in those MDRs
Appropriate Term/Code Not Available,5444,5444
Device Operates Differently Than Expected,3297,3297
Output Problem,2264,2264
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem,1530,1530
Receiver Stimulator Unit,1255,1255
No Device Output,1220,1220
Insufficient Information,1083,1083
Migration or Expulsion of Device,745,745
Electrode,731,731
Migration,510,510
The same report yields medical device reports (MDR) originating with
patients. Here's the Top-10:
Patient Problems,MDRs with this Patient Problem,Events in those MDRs
Failure of Implant,4495,4495
No Code Available,2830,2830
Hearing Impairment,2660,2660
No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient,1496,1496
Unspecified Infection,1319,1319
Pain,1252,1252
No Information,1031,1031
Patient Problem/Medical Problem,668,668
Bacterial Infection,666,666
Deafness,543,543
For product code MCM, from 01JAN2015 to 30SEP2020
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfTPLC/tplc.cfm?id=1640&min_report_year=2015,
the Top-10 TPLC Device Problems (in CSV format):
Device Problems,MDRs with this Device Problem,Events in those MDRs
Appropriate Term/Code Not Available,1593,1593
Loss of Osseointegration,434,434
Failure to Osseointegrate,394,394
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem,274,274
Insufficient Information,39,39
Osseointegration Problem,17,17
Extrusion,9,9
Patient-Device Incompatibility,7,7
Biocompatibility,6,6
Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth,6,6
The same report yields medical device reports (MDR) originating with
patients. Here's the Top-10:
Patient Problems,MDRs with this Patient Problem,Events in those MDRs Unspecified Infection,525,525
No Code Available,522,522
Host-Tissue Reaction,399,399
Bacterial Infection,382,382
Inadequate Osseointegration,373,373
Patient Problem/Medical Problem,309,309
Pain,206,206
Head Injury,71,71
Inflammation,64,64
Skin Irritation,55,55
Swelling,53,53
For product code LXB, from 01JAN2015 to 30SEP2020
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfTPLC/tplc.cfm?id=1635&min_report_year=2015,
the Top-10 TPLC Device Problems (in CSV format):
Device Problems,MDRs with this Device Problem,Events in those MDRs
Appropriate Term/Code Not Available,2157,2157
Loss of Osseointegration,505,505
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem,185,185
Insufficient Information,124,124
Failure to Osseointegrate,34,34
Magnet,31,31
Patient Device Interaction Problem,22,22
Biocompatibility,20,20
Extrusion,17,17
Patient-Device Incompatibility,17,17
Osseointegration Problem,10,10
The same report yields medical device reports (MDR) originating with
patients. Here's the Top-10:
Patient Problems,MDRs with this Patient Problem,Events in those MDRs
No Code Available,671,671
Unspecified Infection,458,458
Bacterial Infection,455,455
No Information,371,371
Patient Problem/Medical Problem,359,359
Pain,304,304
Host-Tissue Reaction,240,240
Hearing Impairment,104,104
Swelling,75,75
Head Injury,65,65
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 14:59:16 -0400
From: Gabe Goldberg <
gabe@gabegold.com>
Subject: 'E.T.' 1982 Atari Game: The True Story Behind the Worst Video Game
Ever (MelMagazine)x
Atari's 1982 E.T. game was so disastrous it's been blamed for the company's downfall and the crash of the entire industry. The man responsible for the game, however, has taken it surprisingly well. [...]
Warshaw agrees that the pits were a problem he didn't foresee.
Unfortunately, he was in such a rush to finish the game he never got to the *first playable* stage, which is when a game is tested by users to work out
any design kinks and flaws.
https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/et-1982-atari-game
What could go wrong with toxic compressed schedule without time for testing?
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:47:57 +0800
From: Richard Stein <
rmstein@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: Fifth of countries at risk of ecosystem collapse (RISKS-32.32)
With ecosystems at risk globally, economies will also experience knock-on effects.
Corbin Hiar, Natural Disasters May Push Global Finances to the Brink,
concisely summarizes anthropogenic climate forcing impact on sovereign economies.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/natural-disasters-may-push-global-finances-to-the-brink/
See "Climate Change and Sovereign Risk":
https://www.eenews.net/assets/2020/10/13/document_cw_01.pdf for details.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 09:52:34 +0100
From: Wols Lists <
antlists@youngman.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Why cars are more "fragile": more technology has reduced
robustness (Drewe, RISKS-32.32)
aiui, UK law defines a "historic vehicle" as one over 25 years old (it was originally one made before a certain date, but that was never updated as the years went by).
That explains the surge in old vehicles on UK roads, as these cars are
exempt from tax, they're now exempt from the MOT, and I believe they are
also exempt from the congestion charge and low emission zones.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 13:16:09 +0100 (BST)
From: David Alexander <
davidalexander440@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: SpaceX Is Building a Military Rocket to Ship Weapons
Anywhere in the World in 1 hour (RISKS-32.32)
The SpaceX initiative to build a rocket to deliver good anywhere in the
world in less than an hour is not a novel idea.
In January 1956 the (UK) BBC radio comedy The Goons had a show on this very subject, called the Jet-propelled NAAFI <
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmCZ9BIeX5c>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 21:10:04 +0200
From: Erling Kristiansen <
erling.kristiansen@xs4all.nl>
Subject: Re: SpaceX Is Building a Military Rocket to Ship Weapons Anywhere
in the World, in 1 hour (RISKS-32.32)
The distance from the launch site to its antipode (the point on the Earth exactly opposite) is roughly 20,000 km or 12,500 miles. At 7,500 mph that
will take 1 hour 40 minutes. And you have to add the extra time spent in the acceleration and deceleration phases where the speed is a lot lower. So something like 2 1/2 to 3 hours is probably about the best one can dream of doing.
And what about the time to fuel the rocket and prepare it for launch?
Typically takes days if everything goes smoothly.
------------------------------
Date: 16 Oct 2020 13:40:42 -0400
From: "John Levine" <
johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: A different way the news is dividing America (Stein, RISKS-31.32)
While it is absolutely true that we have a crisis in the news business,
calling it "redlining" is gratuitous and pretty offensive.
Actual redlining was a policy of not selling real estate to minorities, regardless of their income or ability to pay. Newspaper web sites don't
charge because they want to keep poor people out, they charge because print advertising has collapsed, online advertising pays very little*, and they
have to pay the reporters and keep the lights on. As I'm sure we all
remember, they tried free web sites with online ads and it didn't
work. Where is all this high quality free news supposed to come from?
For a much better analysis, see "Ghosting the News: Local Journalism and the Crisis of American Democracy" by Margaret Sullivan, published in August by Columbia Global Reports. She looks primarily at the growing local news
deserts and the not great options for fixing them.
https://globalreports.columbia.edu/books/ghosting-the-news/
* -- unless you are gatekeeper Google or Facebook.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 11:29:59 +0800
From: Richard Stein <
rmstein@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: A different way the news is dividing America (Levine,
RISKS-32.32)
John -- Thank you for a civil critique and rebuttal. It was not my intent to promote offense.
What word might best encapsulate societal division based on preference to consume freely available, misleading and false news reports versus those who purchase professionally authored, edited, and published news reports? Infolining? No such word exists.
The definition of redlining @
https://www.merriam-webster.com/legal/redlining states, "the illegal
practice of refusing to offer credit or insurance in a particular community
on a discriminatory basis (as because of the race or ethnicity of its residents)." The definition does not incorporate poverty or encompass affordable access to information or news.
As you note, government policies/regulations have promoted business
redlining policies and practices, an immoral betrayal of the democratic idea that "all men are created equal." See
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/20/opinion/fair-housing-act-trump.html, for
a historical perspective.
Choosing to believe that fictional news stories are real and merit re-circulation confounds explanation. A captive audience that endorses falsehoods and conspiracy theories characterizes the allure and
effectiveness of weaponized free speech.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/magazine/free-speech.html
I certainly agree that professional news writing, editing, and reporting requires revenue that funds deserving publication businesses. The access
price to premium factual information is exclusionary: disposable income is needed to procure this modest, daily essential.
Viable reporting holds governments accountable, and promotes economy development, public health, education, civil discourse, and enriches culture
-- all subjects of historical and immediate social merit.
"News is the first rough draft of history" per Philip Graham (
https://www.forbes.com/quotes/7446/). Mr. Graham's quote applies to factual and meretricious news, not the pink stuff.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 2020 11:31:25 -0400
From: "John R. Levine" <
johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: A different way the news is dividing America (RISKS-32.32)
Infolining? No such word exists. ...
The phrase people use is "news desert" but that is more for places with no newspapers at all, not ones that people can't afford. It's news as luxury good, not the snappiest of terms.
But that's not at issue -- what I object to is the misuse of the term redlining, and the author's airy assertion that if the greedy capitalists
would just tear down the paywalls everything would be fine. The particular evil of redlining was that it was pure bigotry with no economic rationale -- real estate agents sell property and banks make loans the same way they
always had, only now to the full set of buyers rather than just to one race. This is nothing like that.
For several centuries the news business had an economic model where
advertisers paid to have their messages included with the news, first in newspapers, then magazines, then radio, then TV. This let the publishers provide the news below cost, for a few cents for newspapers and free for
radio and TV. The Internet totally destroyed that economic model. The
costs of distribution dropped and are shared with consumers, which allowed competing marketplaces to handle ads for cheap, or as at Craigslist mostly
for free. Advertising revenue isn't going back to newsrooms, reporters have
to eat, and saying everyone should have a pony doesn't help.
[PS: Insert obvious snark here about an academic who never had to worry about
where his next paycheck was coming from.]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:35:45 +0000 (UTC)
From: Steve Bacher <
sebmb1@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: A different way the news is dividing America (RISKS-32.32)
This article seems somewhat specious to me. If putting the content of some news sources behind a paywall constitutes creating an "information have"
vs. "information have-not" class system, then in the pre-Internet world
where people had to actually purchase papers, was there a divide between
those who could afford the handful of change for the day's news vs. those
who couldn't? Or between those who went to the trouble of subscribing and those who just dug into their pockets each day?
And FWIW, there are numerous ways to access content from most of those
online journalistic sites while bypassing the paywalls.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:18:40 +0800
From: Richard Stein <
rmstein@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: Continuous glucose monitoring/insulin dosing systems
(RISKS-32.32)
FOLLOW UP FROM ADA
I received this email message in response to my inquiry on glucose monitoring/insulin dosing device deployment from a representative of the American Diabetes Association:
"Hi Richard;
"I assume you mean traditional insulin pumps and CGMs, not implantable.
There are no implanted pumps on the market, and just one CGM that's
implanted subcutaneously, with what I assume is a very small share of the
market.
"Regardless, unfortunately, ADA doesn't have any data other than what one
can find by googling for the results. The companies are guarded with their
sales and usage data, and what I find online is both speculative and
dated. I wish I could give a more substantive answer--this is a question I
get a lot and I never have a very good answer."
Matt Petersen
Vice President, Medical Information and Professional Engagement
2451 Crystal Dr. | Arlington | VA | 22202
Phone: +1 (703) 299-2071
diabetes.org
1-800-DIABETES (800-342-2383)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2020 11:11:11 -0800
From:
RISKS-request@csl.sri.com
Subject: Abridged info on RISKS (comp.risks)
The ACM RISKS Forum is a MODERATED digest. Its Usenet manifestation is
comp.risks, the feed for which is donated by panix.com as of June 2011.
SUBSCRIPTIONS: The mailman Web interface can be used directly to
subscribe and unsubscribe:
http://mls.csl.sri.com/mailman/listinfo/risks
SUBMISSIONS: to risks@CSL.sri.com with meaningful SUBJECT: line that
includes the string `notsp'. Otherwise your message may not be read.
*** This attention-string has never changed, but might if spammers use it.
SPAM challenge-responses will not be honored. Instead, use an alternative
address from which you never send mail where the address becomes public!
The complete INFO file (submissions, default disclaimers, archive sites,
copyright policy, etc.) is online.
<
http://www.CSL.sri.com/risksinfo.html>
*** Contributors are assumed to have read the full info file for guidelines!
OFFICIAL ARCHIVES: http://www.risks.org takes you to Lindsay Marshall's
searchable html archive at newcastle:
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/VL.IS --> VoLume, ISsue.
Also,
ftp://ftp.sri.com/risks for the current volume/previous directories
or
ftp://ftp.sri.com/VL/risks-VL.IS for previous VoLume
If none of those work for you, the most recent issue is always at
http://www.csl.sri.com/users/risko/risks.txt, and index at /risks-32.00
ALTERNATIVE ARCHIVES:
http://seclists.org/risks/ (only since mid-2001)
*** NOTE: If a cited URL fails, we do not try to update them. Try
browsing on the keywords in the subject line or cited article leads.
Apologies for what Office365 and SafeLinks may have done to URLs.
Special Offer to Join ACM for readers of the ACM RISKS Forum:
<
http://www.acm.org/joinacm1>
------------------------------
End of RISKS-FORUM Digest 32.33
************************
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)