Relaxing medical device regulatory requirements during a healthcare crisis

Paul Hercock
Coronavirus and medical device regulations

A healthcare crisis such as the Covid-19 pandemic means that adaptations must be made across the medical device industry. Manufacturers, regulators, and product users are being asked to do more with fewer resources, meaning that processes must be streamlined in order to meet demands.

One step that has been considered is a partial relaxation of regulatory obligations to enable more products to be brought to market. The one-year delay to full implementation of the EU MDR arguably stands as evidence that regulators understand the difficulties that manufacturers are currently facing. Other proposed measures include allowing re-use of single use devices to ensure ongoing availability of critical products.

In the event of a worldwide health crisis, the Medical Device Regulation (EU) 2017/745 allows for a partial step down from full regulatory enforcement. MDR Article 59 describes a procedure for emergency derogation from standard conformity assessment processes in the event of a public health emergency. Article 59 enables Competent Authorities to allow normal conformity assessment procedures to be bypassed for devices that are deemed essential in responding to the healthcare emergency. Unsurprisingly, in the context of the current crisis, Article 59 applications to the MHRA have been very numerous.

Priorities

While it is a priority to ensure that life saving products are made available to staff and patients as quickly as possible, it is also vital that the safety and performance of medical devices is subject to the appropriate level of scrutiny. A balance must be found and the industry must ensure safety as well as product availability. The medical device market is one of the most tightly regulated sectors in the world for good reason — unsafe or ineffective medical devices could cause far more problems than they solve.

We believe that conformity derogation procedures have an important role to play in securing device availability at times of crisis. However, we also believe that they should very much be the exception and that normal medical device regulatory processes should continue to be the default position. Product safety should take priority given the vast range of devices already available on the market.

Understandably, all medical device manufacturers are keen to reduce time and money spent on regulatory processes. However, the best approach is to work with a regulatory professional who will advise on the most efficient route to medical device certification. Working with a services provider who is an MDR expert will ensure than your devices are made available quickly, and that their regulatory approval status is protected well into the future.

Mantra Systems brings medical expertise to MDR compliance. Our team of expertly-trained medical professionals deliver MDR consulting services focused on Clinical Evidence Generation, Clinical Evaluation, PMS, PMCF and clinical investigation design.

Get in touch to discuss your requirements further.

Related articles

  1. Collage art showing a pair of binoculars, an analogy for surveillance.

    How EU MDR Post Market Surveillance differs from FDA post-market expectations

    We compare manufacturer-specific post-market obligations across both regulatory systems.

    Dr Gayle Buchel Dr Gayle Buchel Chief Medical Writer
  2. An arrow arcs from the US over to Europe.

    How EU device classification differs from the US - Are you Prepared?

    Did you know an FDA Class II medical device could be immediately considered as a high-risk Class III device under European Union regulations?

    Gabriela Cardoso Gabriela Cardoso Regulatory Medical Writer
  3. A magnifying glass inspecting a number of wooden cubes with question marks upon them laid upon a blue table. The wooden cube under the magnifying glass has a lightbulb painted on it.

    Fixing the MDR and IVDR? The Commission’s Proposed Amendments and What They Mean for Manufacturers

    Exploring the key elements of this proposal.

    Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Regulatory Medical Writer
  4. Two arms point at a sign and hold a question mark, in an abstract pop-art style.

    Regulatory Reset? The EU’s Proposed Changes to MDR and IVDR Explained

    Changes published in December 2025 aim to streamline EU medical device and in vitro diagnostics. We explain who is impacted and how.

    Dr Gayle Buchel Dr Gayle Buchel Chief Medical Writer
  5. A pair of glasses rests on an eye test chart.

    Did You Know Your Glasses Were a Medical Device? A Regulatory Guide for Manufacturers

    The importance of correct classification and our recommended path to avoid common ophthalmic device 'gotchas'.

    Gabriela Cardoso Gabriela Cardoso Regulatory Medical Writer
  6. A precariously balanced pile of ping-pong balls and wooden bars.

    The Shift from MDD to MDR: Key Differences in Demonstrating Equivalence

    This transition has demanded that device safety must be demonstrated with more evidence. We offer tips for winning equivalence claims.

    Kamiya Crabtree Kamiya Crabtree Regulatory Medical Writer
  7. A pen and notepad, resting on a laptop.

    Periodic Safety Update Report: Requirements under EU MDR

    Post-Market Surveillance has become more stringent. We help you to understand what manufacturers need to consider.

    Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Regulatory Medical Writer
  8. An EU flag on a pole flies between two US flags against a blue sky.

    Webinar: From USA to Europe - Accelerating Your Path to the Medical Device Market

    We showed you how to quickly transform your U.S. regulatory work into a compliant EU MDR submission.

    Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Regulatory Medical Writer
  9. A poster frame for our Clinical Evaluation video series featuring Paul Hercock.

    Guide to Clinical Evaluation: Common Pitfalls & Useful Resources

    Part 5 - In the final video from this series, we explore five major pitfalls that often derail clinical evaluations.

    Paul Hercock Paul Hercock Chief Executive Officer

More articles

Need help producing compliant CEPs & CERs? We are offering FREE CEPs to 5 qualifying applicants per week

Get your free CEP