prepared by: |
Volume
4, Issue 12
June 2, 2005 |
|
![]() Sponsored by Autobag, a turn-key packaging system from Automated Packaging. |
||
|
If you'd like to respond to one of our
columns or to add yourself to our | ||
|
AdvaMed, the Advanced Medical Technology Association, argues against mandatory requirements for bar coding medical devices. Recent calls for bar code rules, such as the one voiced by Premier Inc. and other hospital purchasing groups, "demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of medical devices and... fall far short of justifying the enormous cost of such a requirement," wrote AdvaMed's Janet Trunzo in a letter to FDA May 19.
Also, medical devices may not be subject to the same sort of mix-ups that drugs can be. "There is a well-documented problem: the misadministration of drugs due to similarity in appearance and name," she writes. "There is a dearth of literature which identifies the application of bar codes on medical devices as a as a means go improve patient safety." These points are hard to dispute. But in saying that FDA’s bar coding rule for drugs makes better sense, Trunzo paints too simple of a picture for drugs. "Drug packaging is relatively uniform lending itself to the application of bar codes," she writes. Even if that statement were true, it doesn't mean that a more-complex system of packaging is reason enough to forgo bar coding.
Rather than comparing apples to oranges - or, rather, medical devices to drugs - medical device firms should be asking themselves, Would bar coding make my product safer? If the answer is yes, the cost may be worth it. |
||
![]() Daphne Allen
For information on subscribing to Pharmaceutical & Medical Packaging
News, please click here. | ||