Difference between revisions of "Medical Device Startups and FDA (blog post)"
Tayjacobe22 (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BlogPost | {{BlogPost | ||
| − | |Title=Medical Device Startups and FDA | + | |Has Title=Medical Device Startups and FDA |
|Author=Iris Huang | |Author=Iris Huang | ||
|Content status=Tabled | |Content status=Tabled | ||
Revision as of 16:07, 2 March 2017
 | |
| Blog Post | |
|---|---|
| Title | |
| Author | |
| Series | |
| Publication date | |
| Notes | |
| Image | |
| © edegan.com, 2016 | |
Audience: If you are considering medical devices at all, you have heard of FDA, and you are probably worried about it.
Problem and consequence: There is a lack of info and guidance for the process, which may prevent innovation in the medical devices space. Startups go to market in Europe first.
Especially difficult for startups: small team, limited funding, no prior experience with FDA. The rigid regulations were written long before these innovations were considered possible.
Trend: increasing VC investments in life science and more regulatory scrutiny.
Importance and necessity: You could get in trouble if you don't get clearance. FDA clearance will bring your business credibility and possibly tremendous profits.
What to do: You should be doing the work anyway. Embrace it and work with FDA staff. Examples like Uber, Airbnb.
Interviews: 3 companies with different status.
New programs and resources: DICE, SBA&FDA, Shiftlabs Github open source.
Bottomline: “there are fees you have to pay, regulatory compliance testing labs, and outside expertise that costs money.”
