Blockchain technology applications to postmarket surveillance of medical devices

References

• Regulation (EU). 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Pane J, Francisca RDC, Verhamme KMC, et al. EU postmarket surveillance plans for medical devices. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2019;28(9):1155–1165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pane J, Coloma PM, Verhamme KMC, et al. Evaluating the safety profile of non-active implantable medical devices compared with medicines. Drug Saf. 2017;40(1):37–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pane J, Verhamme KMC, Rebollo I, et al. Descriptive analysis of postmarket surveillance data for hip implants. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2020;29:380-387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackey T, Kuo T, Gummadi B, et al. “Fit-for-purpose?” - challenges and opportunities for applications of blockchain technology in the future of healthcare. BMC Med. 2019;17:68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pirtle C, Ehrenfeld J. Blockchain for healthcare: the next generation of medical records? J Med Syst. 2018;42(9):172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakamoto S. Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system cryptovest; 2008. Available from: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Siyal A, Junejo A, Zawish M, et al. Applications of blockchain technology in medicine and healthcare: challenges and future perspectives. Cryptography. 2019;3(1):3.
   Google Scholar
• Xu L, Shah N, Chen L, et al. Enabling the sharing economy:Privacy respecting contract based on public blockchain. In: Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Blockchain, Cryptocurrencies and Contracts. ACM; Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. 2017. p. 15–21.
   Google Scholar
• Dinh TTA, Wang J, Chen G, et al. Blockbench: A framework for analyzing private blockchains. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Management of Data. ACM; Chicago, USA. 2017. p. 1085–1100.
   Google Scholar
• Mohanta BK, Jena D, Panda SS, et al. Blockchain technology: a survey on applications and security privacy challenges. Internet Things. 2019;8:100107.
   Google Scholar
• Health, Canada. Metal-on-metal hip implants - information for orthopaedic surgeons regarding patient management following surgery - for health professionals; 2012. Available from: http://healthycanadians.gc.ca/recall-alert-rappel-avis/hc-sc/2012/15835a-eng.php
   Google Scholar
• New York Daily News. EU to tighten medical controls after breast implant scandal; 2012. Available from: http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/eu-tighten-medical-controls-pip-breast-implant-scandal-article-1.1169444
   Google Scholar
• Europe M. Keeping up with counterfeiters: the battle against counterfeit medical devices; 2018. Available from: https://www.medtechintelligence.com/column/keeping-up-with-counterfeiters-the-battle-against-counterfeit-medical-devices/
   Google Scholar
• Laskey W, Awad K, Lum J, et al. An analysis of implantable cardiac device reliability. The case for improved postmarketing risk assessment and surveillance. Am J Ther. 2012;19(4):248–254.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiBardino DJ, McElhinney DB, Kaza AK, et al. Analysis of the US food and drug administration manufacturer and user facility device experience database for adverse events involving amplatzer septal occluder devices and comparison with the society of thoracic surgery congenital cardiac surgery database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137(6):1334–1341.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark KK, Sharma DK, Chute CG, et al. Application of a temporal reasoning framework tool in analysis of medical device adverse events. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2011;2011:1366–1371.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tambyraja RR, Gutman MA, Megerian CA. Cochlear implant complications: utility of federal database in systematic analysis. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;131(3):245–250.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tremaine AM, Avram MM. FDA MAUDE data on complications with lasers, light sources, and energy-based devices. Lasers Surg Med. 2015;47(2):133–140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. JRC initiative on signal detection and management. Open Conceptual Framework & Integrated Approach; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Hazell L, Shakir S. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions. Drug Saf. 2006;29(5):385–396.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IMDRF. Methodological principles in the use of international medical device registry data; 2017. (Contract No.: IMDRF/Registry WG/N42FINAL:2017).
   Google Scholar
• Hauser RG, Mugglin AS, Friedman PA, et al. Early detection of an underperforming implantable cardiovascular device using an automated safety surveillance tool. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012;5(2):189–196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duggirala HJ, Herz ND, Caños DA, et al. Disproportionality analysis for signal detection of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator-related adverse events in the food and drug administration medical device reporting system. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012;21(1):87–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. Non-medical determinants of health; 2016. Available from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/data/oecd-health-statistics/oecd-health-data-non-medical-determinants-of-health_data-00546-en
   Google Scholar
• IMDRF. Unique device Identification (UDI) of medical devices; 2013. (Contract No.: IMDRF/UDI WG/N7FINAL:2013).
   Google Scholar
• Torne L. Blockchain: the answer to medtech traceability; 2018. Available from: https://medtech.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/MT122222/Blockchain-The-Answer-to-Medtech-Traceability
   Google Scholar
• Stone D. Blockchain: the challenges and opportunities in healthcare; 2018. Available from: https://www.divurgent.com/knowledge-center/blockchain-in-healthcare/
   Google Scholar
• Investopedia. 51% attack; 2019. Available from: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/51-attack.asp
   Google Scholar
• Palmer D. The vertcoin cryptocurrency just got 51% attacked - again coindesk; 2019. Available from: https://www.coindesk.com/the-vertcoin-cryptocurrency-just-got-51-attacked-again
   Google Scholar
• Hertig A. Blockchain’s once-feared 51 percent attack is now becoming regular; 2018. Available from: https://www.coindesk.com/blockchains-feared-51-attack-now-becoming-regular
   Google Scholar
• Linn LA, Koo MB. Blockchain for health data and its potential use in health it and health care related research. ONC/NIST Use of Blockchain for Healthcare and Res Workshop; Gaithersburg, USA. 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Ekblaw A, Azaria A, Halamka JD, et al. A case study for blockchain in healthcare: “MedRec” prototype for electronic health records and medical research data. IEEE; Washington DC, USA. 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Mattke J, Maier C, Hund A, et al. How an enterprise blockchain application in the U.S. pharmaceuticals supply chain is saving lives. MIS Q Executive. 2019;18(4):245–261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esposito C, De Santis A, Tortora G, et al. Blockchain: a panacea for healthcare cloud-based data security and privacy? IEEE Cloud Comput. 2018;5(1):31–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett B. Blockchain HIE Overview: A Framework for Healthcare Interoperability. Telehealth and Medicine Today. 2018:2(3).
   Google Scholar
• McKinley L, Pithouse D, Sanders J. Blockchain: background challenges and legal issues: DLA piper publications; 2016. Available from: https://www.dlapiper.com/en/denmark/insights/publications/2017/06/blockchain-background-challenges-legal-issues/
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. European commission launches the EU blockchain observatory and forum; 2018. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_18_521
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. Blockchain technologies; 2019. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/blockchain-technologies
   Google Scholar