Mammography Industry: Review of Proposed Accessibility Standards U.S. Access Board May 8, 2012 Atlanta, Georgia.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Building a Cradle-to-Grave Approach with Your Design Documentation and Data Denise D. Dion, EduQuest, Inc. and Gina To, Breathe Technologies, Inc.
Advertisements

1 Welcome Safety Regulatory Function Handbook April 2006.
December 2005 EuP Directive : A Framework for setting eco-design requirements for energy-using products European Commission.
Participation Requirements for a Patient Representative.
CSD for P802.1AS-REV WG Wednesday, 05 November 2014.
Osteoporosis Assesment (DXA) Industry: Review of Proposed Accessibility Standards U.S. Access Board May 8, 2012 Atlanta, Georgia Glenn Nygard, Dir. Engineering.
Department of Tourism Department of Tourism NTSS DRAFT REVIEW FRAMEWORK NTSF MEETING 17 SEPTEMBER 2014.
Disability Criteria Having a record of such an impairment
Anthropometry application on factories Anthropometry It is the concerned with size and proportions of the human body. It is derived from the greek words.
Accessibility.  A building code is a set of rules that specify the minimum acceptable level of safety for buildings. The main purpose of building codes.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Responsibility for Radiation Safety Day 8 – Lecture 4.
47th GRSP Session Status report of Informal Group on CRS Pierre CASTAING Chairman Informal Document No. GRSP (47th session, May 2010, agenda.
Options for Regulation and the Impact of Regulation on the Marketplace 29 November 2005 Alan Kent
ENERGY STAR Computer Monitor Test Methodology Craig Hershberg US EPA
UC Davis Safety Services Monthly Safety Spotlight February 2010: Computer Work Station Ergonomics Safety Discussion Topics Work Station Ergonomics Tips.
RC14001 ® Update GPCA Responsible Care Committee September 23, 2013.
MONA MILLER PAMELA HUBBARD DEBRA BALKCOM Desk Height The height of your computer desk should be about 20 to 28 inches from the ground, depending on the.
CBI Health Presents OFFICE ERGONOMICS
1 Framework Programme 7 Guide for Applicants
All you wanted to know about ambulation and how to make a video!
1 ANSI Conference on U.S. Leadership in ISO and IEC Presented by Mr. Steven P. Cornish Director, International Policy American National Standards Institute.
1 Updates to Texas Administrative Code 1TAC 206 Jeff Kline, Statewide Accessibility Coordinator Texas Department of Information Resources February 8, 2012.
1 Oncor Electric Delivery Proposed Changes To The 2012 National Electrical Safety Code.
Environmental Review of the Use of Pesticides in USAID Projects: Rationale & Approaches.
Prime Responsibility for Radiation Safety
WEST BERKELEY PROJECT Master Use Permits (MUP) May 15, 2012 Response to Concerns & Issues.
Difference between 2003 and 2009 ICC/ANSI A117.1 applicable to the Plumbing Subcode Presented by: John N. Terry Tom Pitcherello.
Medicaid Fee-for-Service: Prior Authorization Criteria & the Role of the DUR Board Charles Agte, Pharmacy Administrator Health Care Services June 19, 2013.
DISCOVERY HEALTH COMMENTS ON THE MEDICINES AND RELATED SUBSTANCES BILL August 2008.
COMPARABILITY PROTOCOLUPDATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCE Manufacturing Subcommittee July 20-21, 2004 Stephen Moore, Ph.D. Chemistry Team.
Ergonomic Considerations for Designing and Selecting Conveyor
Specific Safety Requirements on Safety Assessment and Safety Cases for Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste – GSR Part 5.
National Public Health Performance Standards Local Assessment Instrument Essential Service:6 Enforce Laws and Regulations that Protect Health and Ensure.
Evaluate Phase Pertemuan Matakuliah: A0774/Information Technology Capital Budgeting Tahun: 2009.
Portfolio Committee for Health Medicines and Related Substances Amendment Bill (06/08/08) IMSA represents Research Based Pharmaceutical Companies.
Introduction to Revision of GTR 7
PRESENTATION TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION Evaluation of the Batho Pele Principle of Value for Money in the Public Service.
GSA - ABAAS Leased Facilites Workshop
POSTECH H uman S ystem D esign Lab oratory Chapter 20 GUIDELINES FOR OUTDOOR AREAS Thu. Kim, Hee-jin.
Privecsg Privacy Recommendation PAR Proposal Date: [ ] Authors: NameAffiliationPhone Juan Carlos ZúñigaInterDigital
Building Industry Authority Determination 2003/3 Commentary Paul Clements.
1 IEEE interim, Orlando, Florida, March, 2008new-nfinn-fast-chains-rings-par5c-0308-v1 Fast Recovery for Chains and Rings Proposal for PAR and 5.
State-Industry Regulatory Review Committee Phase 2 – SIRRC II.
Doc.: IEEE sru Submission 11 November 2013 M Ariyoshi, S Kitazawa (ATR)Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal.
Quality Management Systems Advice from ISO/TC 176 for Sector-specific applications.
Overdriven Nails in Structural Sheathings Overview.
EXCEPTION FROM INFORMED CONSENT IN CPR DEVICE TRIALS: PROTECTION OF PATIENTS’ RIGHTS Circulatory System Devices Panel Meeting September 21, 2004 Elisa.
August 6, 2013 LAKE FORREST DRIVE UPDATE. sandyspringsga.gov Lake Forrest Drive Update  Actions To-Date Work Orders – 13 since 2009 for clean-up, 8 of.
Privecsg Privacy Recommendation PAR Proposal Date: [ ] Authors: NameAffiliationPhone Juan Carlos ZúñigaInterDigital
Dartmouth Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) Data Safety Monitoring and Reporting requirements Brown Bag Series: Noon / First Tuesday of the Month.
Analysis of Current Maturity Models and Standards
ISO Global Relevance Case ISO/TC 23/SC 3 & ISO
U.S. FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health Update
FDA’s IDE Decisions and Communications
CLEPA analysis of belt contact width measurement (ref. GRSP/2018/6)
Overdriven Nails in Structural Sheathings
Introduction of Booster Cushions in R129
Introduction of Booster Cushions in R129
Example 1 The following figure shows a view of the driver's seat of a truck cab, with dimensions corresponding to the letters below. The figure of the.
NERC Reliability Standards Development Plan
FISHERIES AND ENVIRONMENT
TRTR Briefing September 2013
EU Tyre Industry comments on document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2019/6
NEW MDR Regulatory Context. NEW MDR Regulatory Context.
Balanced Approach to Noise Mitigation
NERC Reliability Standards Development Plan
1915(c) WAIVER REDESIGN 2019 Brain Injury Summit
Amendments to the Liquor Bill, 2003
Balanced Approach to Noise Mitigation
Amendments to the Liquor Bill, 2003
Presentation transcript:

Mammography Industry: Review of Proposed Accessibility Standards U.S. Access Board May 8, 2012 Atlanta, Georgia

Diagnostic Equipment – Mammography Current State Appropriate ergonomic design and patient accessibility features are goals for all mammography equipment manufacturers Per US FDA / EU MDD, manufacturers are required to address mammography human factors and usability Wheelchair accommodations and standing support features are provided in all systems No specific accessibility architectural standards exist for mammography equipment, but we have general requirements CFR Title 21, MQSA, and clinical organizations explicitly and implicitly define use cases and design requirements (e.g., radiation shielding, breast compression, imaging geometries, patient support features) Consensus standards define safety and performance requirements (e.g., mechanical strength, “pinch points”)

Current Accessibility Features

Diagnostic Equipment - Mammography Question 8: To what extent does diagnostic equipment currently incorporate features that conform to the technical criteria proposed in Chapter M3? Some features and clearances currently comply, but further assessment of certain proposed requirements in the context of mammography applications is required: Breast platform Knee/Toe clearance Standing support definitions

BREAST PLATFORM

Breast Platform Height Standard: M Question 36. a) Is the proposed height range for the breast platform (30 inches high minimum and 42 inches high maximum above the floor) sufficient to accommodate patients seated in a wheelchair? Yes, but based on patient accessibility requests, several manufacturers lower the breast platform to 25” - 28” Recommend reassessing and clarifying height range to be an available range of travel instead of a specific minimum and maximum

KNEE AND TOE CLEARANCE

Knee/Toe Clearance Standard: M Flat gantry base Clearance goes to the floor No provisions for base supports “Knee and toe clearance under breast platforms shall be 25 inches (635 mm) deep.” Figure M5

Example Base Lip Profile Lip often required for structural/seismic stability and installation Lip profiles can be designed for optimal wheelchair accessibility Toe Clearance Concerns

Toe Clearance Amendment To guarantee wheelchair accessibility and structural stability, add an allowable base lip profile to the toe clearance requirements Standard for profile of base lip should be developed from anthropometric data on wheelchair footrest positioning To improve accessibility and minimize technical constraint, clearance should be specified as 25” minimum

Knee Clearance Standard: M Standard references knee clearance relative to the floor “Knee clearance shall be provided at a depth of 11” minimum and 25” maximum at 9” above the floor and at a depth of 8” minimum at 27” above the floor…”

Knee Clearance for Mammography Clearance for legs necessary at a certain distance below breast platform Proper knee/torso clearance is dependent on breast platform contour Dependent on height of breast platform

Knee Clearance Recommendations Ensure accessibility and clarify requirements (recommendation): Restructuring this section to define knee clearance in reference to breast platform height Clarifying interpretation of this knee clearance definition in relation to 25” knee/toe clearance depth requirement (M )

STANDING SUPPORTS

Standing Support Standard: M “Where the support is vertical, it shall be 18” minimum in length and the bottom end of the support shall be 34” high minimum and 37” high maximum above the standing surface.” Derived from ICC A “accessible bathing fixtures” May be inappropriate for mammography applications

Standing Supports for Mammography 6” is ample for gripping surface 49” above standing surface 34”-37” would be too low Standing supports referenced from breast platform Defines arm position relative to breast position Structural strength of supports guaranteed by IEC and IEC safety standards.

Standing Support Recommendations To ensure proper accessibility, recommend: Defining standing supports in relation to the breast platform Reassessing length/geometry requirements for standing supports Considering a specification on how far away from the chest wall the standing supports should be located

REMOVABLE SEAT COMPATIBILITY

Removable Seat Considerations Question 37 b) Should a folding or removable seat be required on other types of diagnostic equipment used by patients in a standing position? Mammography equipment accessibility should be achieved without the requirement for use of a folding or removable seat. Appropriate wheelchair and standing support accommodations should address all accessibility concerns.

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Diagnostic Equipment - Mammography Question 2. What other barriers that affect the accessibility and usability of medical diagnostic equipment should be addressed in future updates to the standards? Additional guidance may need to be considered for wheelchair accessibility (e.g., views other than CC, diagnostic/interventional modes, arm-rest interference/pinch points).

GENERAL QUESTIONS AND REPONSES

Diagnostic Equipment - Mammography Question 9. If diagnostic equipment does not currently incorporate features that conform to all the technical criteria proposed in Chapter M3, which technical criteria can be easily incorporated into the design or redesign and manufacture of equipment with little difficulty or expense? As currently drafted, the non-conforming toe (gantry) clearances and standing support geometries equipment changes would likely involve significant structural modifications and substantial manufacturer re-design/test expense. Re-design expenses and resulting product costs are TBD and would vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. However, if these requirements are reassessed as described in the preceding slides, this cost could be minimized with no compromises to patient accessibility.

Diagnostic Equipment - Mammography Question10. How often is diagnostic equipment redesigned? Typically, mammography equipment design cycles are 5 to 10 years. Would incorporating features that conform to the technical criteria proposed in Chapter M3 in the planned redesign of equipment lessen the economic and technical impacts? Yes. A phased implementation timeline would lessen the impact of redesign, retest, and compliance/registration/regulatory re-filings.

Moving Forward Manufacturers are committed to providing optimal accessibility for all patients and welcome the opportunity to participate in standards development with the Access Board On April 20, 2012 at a meeting of the International Electro-technical Committee (IEC MT-31*) a spreadsheet was distributed to gather input from a broad representation of worldwide mammography equipment manufacturers regarding areas that may conflict with the proposed access requirements in Chapter M3 * IEC MT31 is responsible for development of design and test requirements for the basic safety and essential performance of mammographic X-ray equipment.