• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

医疗器械临床评价认证及移动设备儿科用药计算器 CE 标志认证的障碍:范围综述和定性分析。

CE Accreditation and Barriers to CE Marking of Pediatric Drug Calculators for Mobile Devices: Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis.

机构信息

Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2021 Dec 13;23(12):e31333. doi: 10.2196/31333.

DOI:10.2196/31333
PMID:34898456
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8713103/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Pediatric drug calculators (PDCs) intended for clinical use qualify as medical devices under the Medical Device Directive and the Medical Device Regulation. The extent to which they comply with European standards on quality and safety is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study determines the number of PDCs available as mobile apps for use in the Netherlands that bear a CE mark, and explore the factors influencing the CE marking of such devices among app developers.

METHODS

A scoping review of Google Play Store and Apple App Store was conducted to identify PDCs available for download in the Netherlands. CE accreditation of the sampled apps was determined by consulting the app landing pages on app stores, by screening the United Kingdom Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency's online registry of medical devices, and by surveying app developers. The barriers to CE accreditation were also explored through a survey of app developers.

RESULTS

Of 632 screened apps, 74 were eligible, including 60 pediatric drug dosage calculators and 14 infusion rate calculators. One app was CE marked. Of the 20 (34%) respondents to the survey, 8 considered their apps not to be medical devices based on their intent of use or functionality. Three developers had not aimed to make their app available for use in Europe. Other barriers that may explain the limited CE accreditation of sampled PDC apps included poor awareness of European regulations among developers and a lack of restrictions when placing PDCs in app stores.

CONCLUSIONS

The compliance of PDCs with European standards on medical devices is poor. This puts clinicians and their patients at risk of medical errors resulting from the largely unrestricted use of these apps.

摘要

背景

儿科药物计算器(PDC)旨在用于临床,根据《医疗器械指令》和《医疗器械条例》,属于医疗器械。它们在多大程度上符合欧洲关于质量和安全的标准尚不清楚。

目的

本研究旨在确定荷兰可作为移动应用程序使用的、带有 CE 标志的 PDC 数量,并探讨应用程序开发者对这些设备进行 CE 标记的影响因素。

方法

对 Google Play 商店和 Apple App Store 进行了范围界定性审查,以确定可在荷兰下载的 PDC。通过查阅应用商店上的应用程序登陆页面、筛选英国药品和保健产品监管局(Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency)在线医疗器械注册处、以及对应用程序开发者进行调查,确定了抽样应用程序的 CE 认证情况。还通过对应用程序开发者的调查,探讨了 CE 认证的障碍。

结果

在筛选出的 632 个应用程序中,有 74 个符合条件,包括 60 个儿科药物剂量计算器和 14 个输液速度计算器。有 1 个应用程序带有 CE 标志。在对调查做出回应的 20 个(34%)开发者中,有 8 人认为他们的应用程序并非基于其使用意图或功能的医疗器械。有 3 位开发者并没有将他们的应用程序定位于在欧洲使用。可能解释抽样 PDC 应用程序 CE 认证有限的其他障碍包括开发者对欧洲法规的认识不足,以及在将 PDC 放置在应用程序商店时缺乏限制。

结论

PDC 符合欧洲医疗器械标准的情况不佳。这使得临床医生及其患者面临因广泛不受限制地使用这些应用程序而导致的医疗错误风险。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c887/8713103/28fc62057632/jmir_v23i12e31333_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c887/8713103/28fc62057632/jmir_v23i12e31333_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c887/8713103/28fc62057632/jmir_v23i12e31333_fig1.jpg

相似文献

1
CE Accreditation and Barriers to CE Marking of Pediatric Drug Calculators for Mobile Devices: Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis.医疗器械临床评价认证及移动设备儿科用药计算器 CE 标志认证的障碍:范围综述和定性分析。
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Dec 13;23(12):e31333. doi: 10.2196/31333.
2
The Current State of Mobile Apps Owned by Large Pediatric Hospitals in the United States: Systematic Search and Analysis on Google Play and Apple App Stores.美国大型儿科医院拥有的移动应用程序的现状:对谷歌Play商店和苹果应用商店的系统搜索与分析
JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2022 Oct 6;5(4):e38940. doi: 10.2196/38940.
3
Relevance of Trust Marks and CE Labels in German-Language Store Descriptions of Health Apps: Analysis.德语版健康应用商店描述中信任标志和CE标志的相关性:分析
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Apr 25;6(4):e10394. doi: 10.2196/10394.
4
German Mobile Apps in Rheumatology: Review and Analysis Using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS).德国风湿病学移动应用程序:使用移动应用程序评级量表(MARS)进行的评估与分析。
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Aug 5;7(8):e14991. doi: 10.2196/14991.
5
App-Based Insulin Calculators: Current and Future State.基于 APP 的胰岛素计算器:现状和未来。
Curr Diab Rep. 2018 Oct 4;18(11):123. doi: 10.1007/s11892-018-1097-y.
6
Regulation and accreditation of addictive behaviour applications-navigating the landscape.成瘾行为应用的监管和认证——探索现状。
Addiction. 2021 Dec;116(12):3276-3283. doi: 10.1111/add.15484. Epub 2021 Mar 26.
7
Mobile Apps for Common Noncommunicable Disease Management: Systematic Search in App Stores and Evaluation Using the Mobile App Rating Scale.移动应用程序用于常见非传染性疾病管理:在应用商店中的系统搜索和使用移动应用程序评级量表进行评估。
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2024 Mar 12;12:e49055. doi: 10.2196/49055.
8
Diabetes digital app technology: benefits, challenges, and recommendations. A consensus report by the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) Diabetes Technology Working Group.糖尿病数字 APP 技术:效益、挑战和建议。欧洲糖尿病研究协会(EASD)和美国糖尿病协会(ADA)糖尿病技术工作组的共识报告。
Diabetologia. 2020 Feb;63(2):229-241. doi: 10.1007/s00125-019-05034-1.
9
Exploring Heart Disease-Related mHealth Apps in India: Systematic Search in App Stores and Metadata Analysis.探索印度与心脏病相关的移动健康应用程序:在应用商店中进行系统搜索和元数据分析。
J Med Internet Res. 2025 Mar 10;27:e53823. doi: 10.2196/53823.
10
Psychoeducational Social Anxiety Mobile Apps: Systematic Search in App Stores, Content Analysis, and Evaluation.心理教育社交焦虑移动应用程序:在应用商店中的系统搜索、内容分析与评估
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021 Sep 21;9(9):e26603. doi: 10.2196/26603.

引用本文的文献

1
Continuous Improvement of Digital Health Applications Linked to Real-World Performance Monitoring: Safe Moving Targets?与真实世界性能监测相关的数字健康应用的持续改进:安全的移动目标?
Mayo Clin Proc Digit Health. 2023 Jun 25;1(3):276-287. doi: 10.1016/j.mcpdig.2023.05.010. eCollection 2023 Sep.
2
The regulatory status of health apps that employ gamification.运用游戏化的健康类 APP 的监管现状。
Sci Rep. 2024 Sep 9;14(1):21016. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-71808-2.
3
Comparing the Effectiveness of a Clinical Decision Support Tool in Reducing Pediatric Opioid Dose Calculation Errors: PediPain App vs. Traditional Calculators - A Simulation-Based Randomised Controlled Study.

本文引用的文献

1
Incidence of paediatric 10-fold medication errors in Wales.威尔士儿科 10 倍用药差错发生率。
Arch Dis Child. 2021 Jul;106(7):656-661. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2020-319130. Epub 2020 Oct 27.
2
Beyond validation: getting health apps into clinical practice.超越验证:将健康应用程序应用于临床实践。
NPJ Digit Med. 2020 Feb 3;3:14. doi: 10.1038/s41746-019-0212-z. eCollection 2020.
3
Use of Health Apps by Nurses for Professional Purposes: Web-Based Survey Study.护士出于专业目的使用健康类应用程序:基于网络的调查研究。
比较临床决策支持工具在减少儿科阿片类药物剂量计算错误方面的有效性:PediPain 应用程序与传统计算器——基于模拟的随机对照研究。
J Med Syst. 2024 Apr 17;48(1):43. doi: 10.1007/s10916-024-02060-4.
4
Can Apple and Google continue as health app gatekeepers as well as distributors and developers?苹果和谷歌能否既继续充当健康应用的把关者,又同时扮演发行商和开发者的角色?
NPJ Digit Med. 2023 Jan 31;6(1):8. doi: 10.1038/s41746-023-00754-6.
5
Impact of a clinical decision support system on paediatric drug dose prescribing: a randomised within-subject simulation trial.临床决策支持系统对儿科药物剂量处方的影响:一项随机自身对照模拟试验。
BMJ Paediatr Open. 2023 Jan;7(1). doi: 10.1136/bmjpo-2022-001726.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Nov 1;7(11):e15195. doi: 10.2196/15195.
4
New European Regulation for Medical Devices: What Is Changing?新欧洲医疗器械法规:有何变化?
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2019 Sep;42(9):1272-1278. doi: 10.1007/s00270-019-02247-0. Epub 2019 May 23.
5
Evaluation of an Electronic Dosing Calculator to Reduce Pediatric Medication Errors.评估一种电子剂量计算器以减少儿科用药错误。
Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2019 Apr;58(4):413-416. doi: 10.1177/0009922818821871. Epub 2019 Jan 8.
6
The need for transparency of clinical evidence for medical devices in Europe.欧洲医疗器械临床证据透明度的需求。
Lancet. 2018 Aug 11;392(10146):521-530. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31270-4. Epub 2018 Jul 17.
7
Mobile Health Applications for Pediatric Care: Review and Comparison.用于儿科护理的移动健康应用程序:综述与比较
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2018 May;52(3):383-391. doi: 10.1177/2168479017725557. Epub 2017 Sep 12.
8
Pediatric Weight Errors and Resultant Medication Dosing Errors in the Emergency Department.急诊科儿童体重误差及由此导致的用药剂量误差
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2019 Sep;35(9):637-642. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000001277.
9
Medical apps for smartphones: lack of evidence undermines quality and safety.智能手机医疗应用程序:缺乏证据损害质量与安全。
Evid Based Med. 2013 Jun;18(3):90-2. doi: 10.1136/eb-2012-100885. Epub 2012 Aug 25.
10
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.系统评价与Meta分析的首选报告项目:PRISMA声明。
BMJ. 2009 Jul 21;339:b2535. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2535.