Skip to main content

Available Total Quality Management Tools

BayBiotech.NET

Total Quality Management (or TQM) is a management concept coined by W. Edwards Deming. One of the principal aims of TQM is to limit errors to 1 per 1 million units produced. There are several TQM tools available today to analyze and assess qualitative and quantitative data. These tools can be examined and used to enhance the overall quality of the procedures, products or the work environment.

Some of the most common TQM tools in use today are Pie Charts and Bar Graphs, Histograms, Run charts, Pareto Charts, Force Field Analysis, Ishikawa or Fishbone Diagrams, Tree Diagrams, Brainstorming, Flow Charts, Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle and Scatter Diagrams.

Proper integration and use of these tools ultimately assist in processing data such as identifying collecting policies, enhancing work flows, ensuring client satisfaction by surveying their needs and analyzing them accordingly and creating an overall high level of quality in all areas of your organization. Use and choice of various tools remain flexible within an organization. To read more about the Total Quality Management Tools, follow the links as under:


1.http://www.slais.ubc.ca/people/students/resumes/C_Payne/media_pdf/TQMTools.pdf
2.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_quality_management
3.http://www.bexcellence.org/Total-Quality-Management-Tools.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Amendments for High Risk Device Type Regulatory Pathway

BayBiotech.NET Government Accounting Office (“GAO”) has issued a long-awaited report evaluating the use of the 510(k) process by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA” or the “Agency”) in the January of 2009. Report mainly focused on Preamendment class III devices. Although most high-risk class III medical devices are subject to the demanding premarket approval (“PMA”) process, preamendment class III devices may be cleared through the 510(k) pathway until FDA issues regulations requiring a PMA. Under the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990, FDA was required either to reclassify preamendment class III devices into class I or II, or (2) issue regulations requiring PMA approval for the devices, GAO noted that 20 preamendment class III device types have not yet been addressed by the Agency. GAO has urged FDA to take required steps to address the remaining class III devices that continue to be eligible for 510(k) review. As a result of the report, FDA has committed to address al...
Post a Comment
Read more

Harmonization by Doing (HBD): Japan & U.S. Collaboration

BayBiotech.NET HBD is an international cooperative effort by Japan and US for regulatory convergence for Medical Devices. The efforts are focused on to develop global clinical trials and address regulatory barriers for timely device approvals. To address the needs for additional evaluation, the HBD initiative is a pilot project launched jointly by FDA and MHLW-PMDA for the premarket review of device cardiovascular technology. Instead of taking a theoretical approach to harmonization, HBD is focused on Proof of concept by utilizing parallel development, application submissions and review of actual medical device projects. HBD Study intends to collect and analyze regulatory submission data from multiple applications in the U.S. and Japan. The purpose of the study is to further understand differences that may exist with format and content, to define best practices and to improve globally harmonized processes. To read more about the HBD program, follow the link: http://www.fda.gov/M...
Post a Comment
Read more

What to include in Traditional 510(k) Filing for Medical Devices

BayBiotech.NET A 510k is a premarket submission made to FDA to demonstrate that a medical device to be marketed is at least as safe and effective, that is, substantially equivalent, to a legally marketed device. A Traditional 510(k) submission must include the required elements as per 21 CFR 807.87 (Information required in a premarket notification submission):  the name of device, (the trade or proprietary name), if any, and the common or usual name or classification name of the device.  description of the device, include device specifications and reference applicable guidance documents, special controls, or standards; photographs or engineering drawings should be supplied, if applicable.  comparison with a predicate device(s), indicating similarities and/or differences accompanied by data, as appropriate; this information may include an identification of materials, design considerations, energy expected to be used or delivered by the device, and a description of the operatio...
Post a Comment
Read more