IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v126y2022i12p1233-1240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

After the four-year transition period: Is the European Union's Medical Device Regulation of 2017 likely to achieve its main goals?

Author

Listed:
  • Shatrov, Kosta
  • Blankart, Carl Rudolf

Abstract

Following a series of major scandals over the past two decades, the medical device industry is now undergoing a major regulatory change: the implementation of the European Union Medical Device Regulation (MDR) of 2017. After a transitional period of four years, the MDR became fully binding in May 2021. Although the medium- and long-term impacts of the MDR are still unclear, a range of scholars, health care professionals, and industry representatives have begun to publish early evidence and publicize their views on how the new regulation may impact free trade and patient safety. Even a cursory view of their output reveals hypotheses and opinions that could hardly be more divergent. The reasons for this disagreement are unclear and may extend beyond the different interests of the various stakeholder groups. To find out why this might be the case, we examine the MDR and seek to improve scholarly understanding of this most extensive regulation of medical devices since the early 1990s. We offer policymakers suggestions to help them improve future regulation. Based on theoretical considerations, we conclude that while the MDR is highly likely to strengthen the internal market of the EU, its impact on patient safety will remain unclear as long as there are no comprehensive studies on this topic that are based on empirical data.

Suggested Citation

  • Shatrov, Kosta & Blankart, Carl Rudolf, 2022. "After the four-year transition period: Is the European Union's Medical Device Regulation of 2017 likely to achieve its main goals?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(12), pages 1233-1240.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:126:y:2022:i:12:p:1233-1240
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.09.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016885102200255X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.09.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stern, Ariel Dora, 2017. "Innovation under regulatory uncertainty: Evidence from medical technology," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 181-200.
    2. Matthew Grennan & Robert J. Town, 2020. "Regulating Innovation with Uncertain Quality: Information, Risk, and Access in Medical Devices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(1), pages 120-161, January.
    3. Zippel, Claus & Bohnet-Joschko, Sabine, 2017. "Post market surveillance in the german medical device sector – current state and future perspectives," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(8), pages 880-886.
    4. Campillo-Artero, Carlos, 2013. "A full-fledged overhaul is needed for a risk and value-based regulation of medical devices in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 38-44.
    5. Blankart, Carl Rudolf & Dams, Florian & Penton, Hannah & Kaló, Zoltán & Zemplényi, Antal & Shatrov, Kosta & Iskandar, Rowan & Federici, Carlo, 2021. "Regulatory and HTA early dialogues in medical devices," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(10), pages 1322-1329.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Semjonova Nadezhda, 2020. "Economic Tendencies of the European and Latvian Medical Device Market," Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 34(1), pages 297-310, February.
    2. Seokbeom Kwon & Jan Youtie & Alan Porter & Nils Newman, 2024. "How does regulatory uncertainty shape the innovation process? Evidence from the case of nanomedicine," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 262-302, February.
    3. Gamba, Simona & Magazzini, Laura & Pertile, Paolo, 2021. "R&D and market size: Who benefits from orphan drug legislation?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    4. Amaral-Garcia, S.;, 2022. "Medical Device Companies and Doctors: Do their interactions affect medical treatments?," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 22/10, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    5. Aleksandra Torbica & Rosanna Tarricone & Jonas Schreyögg & Mike Drummond, 2022. "Pushing the boundaries of evaluation, diffusion, and use of medical devices in Europe: Insights from the COMED project," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 1-9, September.
    6. Bjoern Schwander, 2014. "Early health economic evaluation of the future potential of next generation artificial vision systems for treating blindness in Germany," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-10, December.
    7. Claus Zippel & Sabine Bohnet-Joschko, 2021. "Rise of Clinical Studies in the Field of Machine Learning: A Review of Data Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-14, May.
    8. Choi, Soo Jeong & Nam, Ki Chang & Choi, Sooin & Kim, Jin Kuk & Lee, You Kyoung & Kwon, Bum Sun, 2021. "The establishment of the Korean medical device safety information monitoring center: Reviewing ten years of experience," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(7), pages 941-946.
    9. Matthew Grennan & Robert J. Town, 2020. "Regulating Innovation with Uncertain Quality: Information, Risk, and Access in Medical Devices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(1), pages 120-161, January.
    10. Dranove, David & Garthwaite, Craig & Heard, Christopher & Wu, Bingxiao, 2022. "The economics of medical procedure innovation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    11. Margaret K. Kyle, 2019. "The Alignment of Innovation Policy and Social Welfare: Evidence from Pharmaceuticals," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 20, pages 95-123, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Ferriani, Simone & Lazerson, Mark H. & Lorenzoni, Gianni, 2020. "Anchor entrepreneurship and industry catalysis: The rise of the Italian Biomedical Valley," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    13. Weisheng Mao & Yexi Zhong, 2024. "The Influence of Demand-Based Policy Instruments on Urban Innovation Quality—Evidence from 269 Cities in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-16, March.
    14. Raimundo, António M. & Oliveira, A. Virgílio M. & Silva, Cristóvão, 2018. "Replacement costs of cold storage equipment for medical products of public healthcare establishments of European Union countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(12), pages 1403-1411.
    15. Ziyi Zhao & Banghao Zhou, 2022. "Latecomers’ Isomorphic R&D Strategy and the Relationship With Performance: A Study on Chinese Pharmaceutical Firms," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    16. Sofia Amaral-Garcia, 2020. "Medical Device Companies and Doctors: Do their Interactions Affect Medical Treatments ?," Working Papers ECARES 2020-18, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    17. Alberto Galasso & Hong Luo, 2018. "When does Product Liability Risk Chill Innovation? Evidence from Medical Implants," NBER Working Papers 25068, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Galasso, Alberto & Luo, Hong, 2016. "Tort Reform and Innovation," CEPR Discussion Papers 11358, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Zhou, Jiehong & Jin, Yu & Liang, Qiao, 2021. "Quality inspection, information disclosure and wholesale vendors’ traceability adoption," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313943, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Reypens, Lina & Bacq, Sophie & Milanov, Hana, 2021. "Beyond bricolage: Early-stage technology venture resource mobilization in resource-scarce contexts," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(4).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:126:y:2022:i:12:p:1233-1240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.