<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><Articles><Article><id>78</id><JournalTitle>GLOBAL REGULATIONS ON THE APPROVALS, MANUFACTURER AND MARKETING OF MEDICAL DEVICES IN REGULATED COUNTRIES AND EMERGING MARKETS</JournalTitle><Abstract>Devices are one of the most important health intervention tools available for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment
of diseases, and for the patient rehabilitation. However access to these devices is an ongoing challenge particularly in lowand middle income countries (LMICs).The emergency care research institute (ECRI) nomenclature called the universal
medical device nomenclature system (UMDNS) the UMDNS terms are harmonized with the classification system of the
USMA and exist in ten languages. The global medical device nomenclature (GMDN) codes. The GMDN code is built
according to EN ISO 15225 and is a collaborating between the EU, EFTA, USA and Canada. The GMDN terms only exit in
English but can be translated with special software. This nomenclature system is required for registering a medical device
within the EU. The global harmonization task force described further down has developed a recommended classification
system where medical devices are divided into class A, B, C & D where class D represents the highest risk. The world health
organization (WHO), with support from the European Union (EU) developed to analyze the barriers in emerging markets to
increasing access to safe and high quality medical devices and to examine the contribution that local production and
technology transfer of medical devices. The effectiveness of existing regulatory frameworks for medical devices in regulated
countries to ensure their performance, safety, and quality. This article provides a comparative analysis of medical device
regulation in the various countries jurisdictions, explores current reforms to improve the existing systems and discusses
additional actions that should be considered to fully meet this aim. Medical device regulation must be improved to safe guard
public health and ensure that high-quality and effective technologies reach patients. These regulatory systems differ in their
mandate and orientation, organization, pre- and post-market evidence requirements, and transparency of process. Despite
these differences, these jurisdictions face similar challenges for ensuring that only safe and effective devices reach the
market, monitoring real world use, and exchanging pertinent information on devices with key users such as clinicians and
patients. This paper examines the regulatory requirements for medical devices in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, India, Japan,
Mexico and Russia, principally focused on strengthening regulatory processes, enhancing post market regulation through
more robust surveillance systems and improving the traceability and monitoring of devices. Some changes in premarket
requirements for devices are being considered</Abstract><Email>alagusundaram77@gmail.com</Email><articletype>Research</articletype><volume>5</volume><issue>2</issue><year>2015</year><keyword>LMICS,ECRI,WHO,Premarket requirements,Medical devices</keyword><AUTHORS>Alagusundaram M,Prathyusha B,Jayachandra Reddy P</AUTHORS><afflication>Department of Pharmaceutics and Drug Regulatory Affairs, Krishna Teja Pharmacy College, Chadalawada Nagar, Tirupatiâ€“ 517501, Andhra Pradesh, India.,Department of Pharmaceutics and Drug Regulatory Affairs, Krishna Teja Pharmacy College, Chadalawada Nagar, Tirupatiâ€“ 517501, Andhra Pradesh, India.,Department of Pharmaceutics and Drug Regulatory Affairs, Krishna Teja Pharmacy College, Chadalawada Nagar, Tirupatiâ€“ 517501, Andhra Pradesh, India.</afflication></Article></Articles>