Dental Lab Owners Association of California · Dana Point, CA
We have another Regulatory class offered on Sunday, November 17 at 7am & 10am provided by Gary Morgan...See more of Safelink Consulting, Inc. He will present the latest news from OSHA, including infection control. Major changes in the Hazard Communication Standard require new chemical labeling, new Safety Data Sheets, and that training on the new changes be completed by December 1st. PLEASE REGISTER FOR THIS COURSE ONLINE! www.dloac.org
Renata Budny, CDT · Assistant Professor at NYC College of Technology
The seminar attendance is filling out fast.
The refreshments will be served in...See more room N 403 at 5-6pm and the seminar will take place in Atrium Amphitheater 6-8pm at NYCCT.
Please ask security guards for guidance on how to get to these locations.
Greater New York CDT Study Group is providing 4 educational and 1 infection control seminar during academic year. Refreshments are provided from students and dental professionals membership fees to our organization. Therefore, upcoming event is free for members but the students will be collecting membership fees from dental professionals. For more information email Renata Budny at email@example.com.
GNYCDTSG members should have their membership card and the attending CDTs please make sure to have your CDT number to receive 2CDT credits for the seminar.
Thank you very much and we are looking forward to seeing you on Thursday.
For those looking for the Infection Control hour for CDTs, this counts. 1 hour of regulatory standards meets the CDT requirement.
Mark Jackson, RDT · Owner at Precision Ceramics Dental Lab
NADL Meets with U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
On May 1st, a contingent of eight representatives...See more from the dental laboratory industry (appointed by NADL) met with fourteen officials and staff from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) at their headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland.
This meeting was the result of interaction that has taken place between the NADL and FDA since January of this year relative to a number of issues in terms of new technology (materials and equipment), process changes in the industry and enforcement.
The FDA brought personnel from different divisions of the agency to the meeting including key staff from the Office of Device Evaluation; Dental Devices Branch;Division of Anesthesiology, General Hospital, Infection Control and Dental Devices; Office of Chief Counsel and Office of Regulatory Affairs and Compliance/Enforcement Division.
Effectively, the FDA is evaluating current aspects of how dental laboratories manufacture dental devices. As the dental laboratory industry evolves in terms of using new materials and equipment, the agencyâs perspective on what elements of federal regulations apply to our constituents is changing.
A number of topics rose to the top in terms of potential FDA action:
The FDA has questions/concerns on what tasks dental laboratories are actually performing related to implant abutments (both the design element and milling). The key concern is what protocols are in place when a dental laboratory can ask an implant manufacturer for an override on built in software thresholds for angulation.
There are a couple of options for FDA to consider. One is to look at whether or not dental laboratories would have to have a pre market 510k approval for conducting such processes or two, provide some specific guidance on how these tasks should be performed. Itâs more likely that a guidance document would be released rather than requiring dental laboratories to seek 510 approval. That would be an expensive proposition for most dental laboratories to undergo and it was mutually agreed that for an industry of our size and make up that this option would be overkill and not necessary.
FDA is reviewing the âbrandedâ products that dental laboratories market to dentists. When a dental laboratory brands a product such as âXYZ Crownâ or âABC nightguardsâ technically, a laboratory should register this product with FDA under its name since by branding it under the laboratoryâs name could be considered that the device is adulterated if the device is manufactured based on a manufacturers 510k market approval.
NADL and FDA held considerable discussion on enforcement both in terms of inspections and un-registered activity or mislabeling. Both parties came to some agreement on the best way for the agency to enforce existing regulations rather than seek additional oversight authority. FDA is interested in exerting its authority on dental laboratories that are not following registration and listing and labeling requirements when they are importing dental restorations.
On another element of enforcement, NADL will be developing some tutorial documents for the FDA so that they can use these resources to assist agency inspectors when they visit dental laboratories so the inspector knows what types of dental devices and processes are present in a laboratory. In many cases, those dental laboratories that have had inspections from FDA in the past, have vastly different experiences. For example, some inspectors go beyond what is required based on a dental laboratory environment, thinking they are a raw material or equipment manufacturer.
In terms of enforcement, NADL stressed that dental offices that have in house laboratories, under the federal regulations are defined in the same manner as a commercial dental laboratory. The fact that a dentist is on site should have no impact, as dental devices are being manufactured in both settings.
NADLâs Board of Directors will be reviewing next steps to best serve its memberâs interests on this important subject. FDA is seeking further input from NADL during the summer so that it can outline an action plan for any future guidance it may deem necessary to publish.
Â© Copyright 2012, National Association of Dental Laboratories, NADL
Nine staff members attended the Chamber of Commerce awards luncheon; (front row, l. to r.): Betty Morgan,...See more receiving and infection control; Linda Edmonds, vice president; Bob Edmonds, president; and Patty Keener, customer service representative; (back row, l. to r.): Larry Brooks, supervisor cosmetic ceramic department; Maryann Frye, supervisor crown and bridge; Steve Edmonds, technical supervisor; Jim Bauer, general manager; and Dale Wester, director of training and education. Bob Edmonds proudly holds the commemorative plaque he received as part of the award. A prominent Manufacturer of the Year banner hangs proudly in the laboratory as well.