ISO 13485:2016 certified · Startup India (DPIIT) recognised · NVIDIA Inception program member +91 44 4690 0555info@medoqi.tech
Home/Insights/Case studies
Case studies

Client Success Stories

19 representative engagements across regulatory, quality, clinical and post-market work. Each one sets out the challenge the client faced, what our specialists did and the outcome. Client names are withheld for confidentiality.

Programmes with measured results

Clinical evaluation at scale

Long-running clinical evaluation and medical writing programmes, with the delivery figures we track.

Clinical evaluation

Multi-geography CER programme

Client profile
Medical device manufacturer with a multi-market portfolio
Challenge
Limited bandwidth, no trained medical writers, and a need for domain SMEs across several markets
Scope
CER authoring and updates for submissions in several geographies
Method
Dedicated writers and reviewers, deliverable-level planning and time-critical delivery management
40+CERs developed
100%On-time delivery
Clinical evaluation · Literature

Ophthalmic materials literature surveillance

Client profile
Manufacturer of ophthalmic materials
Challenge
Recurring delays and limited literature-search know-how
Scope
Literature search reports across a broad product range
Method
Expert team, an agreed roadmap and a customised template
90–360SKUs reviewed and documented
100%Screening efficiency
Clinical evaluation · Medical writing

Neurovascular portfolio support

Client profile
Neurovascular device manufacturer
Challenge
Overlapping EU MDR, HAS France, NMPA and FDA deadlines across three product verticals
Scope
CERs, CEPs, SSCPs, clinical study reports and PMCF plans
Method
Dedicated team serving 13 client contacts with end-to-end document management
60+Projects in six months
>95%Quality compliance
Regulatory affairs · 4 case studies

Regulatory affairs

Technical documentation, submissions and registrations prepared to hold up at review.

Regulatory Affairs services →
Case 01 · Regulatory

EU MDR Technical Documentation Remediation

Legacy technical documentation was not consistently aligned with current MDR requirements.

Client contextAn established manufacturer preparing a Notified Body review

01Challenge
  • Legacy files contained gaps against Annex II/III and GSPR evidence expectations.
  • Clinical, risk, labelling and PMS documents used inconsistent claims.
  • Fragmented source records slowed cross-functional reviews.
02What we did
  • Completed an evidence-based regulatory gap assessment and prioritised remediation register.
  • Revised the technical documentation structure, GSPR matrix and core regulatory sections.
  • Reconciled clinical, risk and PMS references; coordinated cross-functional closure reviews.
03Outcome
  • Delivered a consolidated, controlled technical documentation package.
  • Closed identified documentation inconsistencies and established a traceable review record.
Case 02 · Regulatory

FDA 510(k) Submission Readiness

Converting an incomplete regulatory evidence set into a structured submission.

Client contextA manufacturer planning entry into the United States

01Challenge
  • Predicate rationale and device claims were not consistently supported.
  • Verification evidence, risk documentation and labelling were held in separate systems.
  • Submission responsibilities and deficiency-response ownership were unclear.
02What we did
  • Reviewed classification and pathway assumptions and documented predicate comparisons.
  • Mapped claims and substantial-equivalence arguments to supporting evidence.
  • Organised submission sections, source-document index and internal technical review cycles.
03Outcome
  • Completed a structured submission-ready documentation package for management review.
  • Improved traceability between device claims, testing, labelling and risk controls.
Case 03 · Regulatory

EU IVDR Transition & Technical File Alignment

Addressing gaps between legacy documentation and IVDR evidence expectations.

Client contextAn IVD manufacturer updating its EU compliance strategy

01Challenge
  • Intended-purpose and performance claims differed across records.
  • Scientific validity, analytical and clinical evidence lacked a unified rationale.
  • GSPR and PMS documentation were not consistently linked to the performance evaluation.
02What we did
  • Performed a requirement-by-requirement assessment against the applicable IVDR provisions.
  • Aligned intended purpose, claims, performance evidence and supporting technical records.
  • Established corrective-action ownership and completed an evidence-linked documentation review.
03Outcome
  • Produced an aligned IVDR documentation set and a traceable gap-closure register.
  • Improved consistency across the performance evaluation, risk file and GSPR evidence.
Case 04 · Regulatory

Multi-Country Regulatory Registration Support

Standardising evidence for parallel international registration activities.

Client contextA manufacturer expanding into multiple regulatory jurisdictions

01Challenge
  • Different national dossier formats led to repeated document preparation.
  • Regulatory roles, registrations and country-specific evidence needs were unclear.
  • Local queries were managed without a centralised response history.
02What we did
  • Developed jurisdiction-specific regulatory requirement and submission matrices.
  • Established a common master dossier with controlled country-specific annexes.
  • Coordinated document requests, submission review and regulator-query responses.
03Outcome
  • Completed consistent market-specific dossier packages.
  • Established a reusable controlled document library and jurisdictional tracking mechanism.
Quality & QMS · 4 case studies

Quality & QMS

Quality systems, CAPA, risk management and design controls brought back under control and made auditable.

Quality & QMS services →
Case 05 · Quality

ISO 13485 QMS Remediation & FDA QMSR Alignment

Modernising a fragmented quality system for harmonised compliance.

Client contextA medical device organisation strengthening its quality framework

01Challenge
  • Obsolete procedures did not reflect actual operational controls.
  • CAPA, supplier oversight, change control and training evidence were inconsistent.
  • Teams lacked clear process ownership and objective evidence for audits.
02What we did
  • Completed a clause-mapped gap assessment and ranked remediation activities.
  • Revised SOPs, process maps, records and training materials against applicable requirements.
  • Reviewed implementation evidence and supported process-owner readiness sessions.
03Outcome
  • Delivered a more coherent and auditable QMS document architecture.
  • Established traceable remediation actions, responsibilities and evidence records.
Case 06 · Quality

Audit Nonconformity & CAPA Closure Support

Converting audit observations into documented, sustainable corrective action.

Client contextA regulated manufacturer addressing external-audit findings

01Challenge
  • Root-cause analyses were inconsistent and corrections were confused with corrective actions.
  • Closure packages lacked implementation evidence and effectiveness criteria.
  • Responsibilities were dispersed across multiple functions.
02What we did
  • Reassessed findings for systemic causes and relevant process impacts.
  • Supported root-cause analysis, CAPA plans, controlled-document updates and training.
  • Established effectiveness-check criteria and compiled objective evidence of closure.
03Outcome
  • Completed evidence-organised CAPA response packages for review.
  • Improved accountability and repeatability of the nonconformity-management process.
Case 07 · Quality

ISO 14971 Risk Management File Remediation

Re-establishing consistency across hazards, risk controls and downstream records.

Client contextA manufacturer with an evolving product portfolio

01Challenge
  • Hazards, hazardous situations and harms were described inconsistently.
  • Design changes and complaints were not systematically reflected in the risk files.
  • Risk-control evidence and benefit-risk conclusions were difficult to trace.
02What we did
  • Reconstructed risk analyses using a consistent hazard-to-harm methodology.
  • Linked risk controls to verification, labelling, clinical and PMS source records.
  • Updated risk management documentation and review/approval workflows.
03Outcome
  • Delivered harmonised risk management records and a consolidated traceability structure.
  • Resolved identified discrepancies across risk, labelling, clinical and PMS documents.
Case 08 · Quality

Design Controls & DHF Remediation

Restoring a controlled design history following successive product changes.

Client contextA medical device manufacturer with legacy design records

01Challenge
  • Design inputs and outputs were fragmented across teams and suppliers.
  • Verification, validation and change-impact decisions lacked consistent links.
  • Historical approvals were difficult to reconstruct during reviews.
02What we did
  • Completed a design-control documentation inventory and gap assessment.
  • Built requirements-to-verification traceability and documented change impacts.
  • Supported remediation of design review, validation and controlled approval records.
03Outcome
  • Organised a reviewable Design History File and closure evidence index.
  • Strengthened traceability and governance for subsequent product changes.
Clinical & performance evidence · 4 case studies

Clinical & performance evidence

Clinical evaluation, literature reviews, PMCF and IVD performance evidence that reviewers can trace.

Clinical & Performance Evaluation services →
Case 09 · Clinical

EU MDR Clinical Evaluation Report Remediation

Building a defensible clinical evidence narrative from disparate data.

Client contextA manufacturer maintaining EU regulatory compliance

01Challenge
  • The existing CER did not clearly integrate state of the art and clinical claims.
  • Literature, complaint and PMCF findings were evaluated in separate documents.
  • Benefit-risk conclusions required stronger evidentiary support.
02What we did
  • Updated the Clinical Evaluation Plan and documented literature search methodology.
  • Critically appraised relevant clinical evidence and aligned safety/performance endpoints.
  • Reconciled clinical conclusions with risk management, labelling and PMS inputs.
03Outcome
  • Completed an updated, review-ready CER and supporting evidence tables.
  • Established a clearer rationale linking clinical evidence to intended clinical benefits.
Case 10 · Clinical

Systematic Literature Review & Evidence Synthesis

Creating reproducible clinical evidence packages across therapeutic areas.

Client contextA manufacturer requiring recurring literature documentation

01Challenge
  • Search methods and inclusion criteria varied across prior reports.
  • High literature volume created reviewer inconsistency and documentation delays.
  • Extracted evidence lacked a standardised quality-check process.
02What we did
  • Designed repeatable search protocols with pre-specified selection criteria.
  • Conducted screening, critical appraisal and structured evidence extraction.
  • Applied independent QC and documented exclusions, decisions and references.
03Outcome
  • Delivered standardised literature search reports and auditable extraction datasets.
  • Established a repeatable evidence-surveillance workflow for future updates.
Case 11 · Clinical

PMCF Planning & Evaluation Documentation

Strengthening the lifecycle link between clinical evaluation and post-market evidence.

Client contextA manufacturer updating its clinical follow-up approach

01Challenge
  • Residual clinical uncertainties were not translated into actionable PMCF activities.
  • Data collection objectives and evaluation methods were insufficiently defined.
  • PMCF outputs were not systematically reflected in clinical documentation.
02What we did
  • Reviewed clinical evidence gaps and the residual-risk profile.
  • Revised PMCF objectives, methods, endpoints and data-evaluation plans.
  • Prepared PMCF evaluation documentation and aligned the CER/PMS feedback process.
03Outcome
  • Completed an evidence-linked PMCF documentation package.
  • Improved traceability between identified clinical questions and planned follow-up evidence.
Case 12 · Clinical

IVD Performance Evaluation Documentation

Integrating scientific, analytical and clinical performance assessments.

Client contextAn IVD organisation updating its performance evidence

01Challenge
  • Performance claims were not consistently supported across study summaries.
  • Scientific validity, analytical and clinical performance records were fragmented.
  • The performance evaluation narrative and residual evidence gaps were unclear.
02What we did
  • Established a performance evaluation structure aligned with intended purpose.
  • Reviewed study evidence, limitations and the evidence supporting individual claims.
  • Prepared an integrated evaluation report and supporting literature review records.
03Outcome
  • Completed an internally coherent performance evaluation document set.
  • Clarified evidence sufficiency, residual limitations and follow-up actions.
Post-market & vigilance · 4 case studies

Post-market & vigilance

PSURs, complaint handling, vigilance and the feedback loop into the risk and clinical files.

Post-Market & Vigilance services →
Case 13 · Post-market

EU MDR PSUR Authoring & Surveillance Consolidation

Transforming dispersed post-market inputs into a defensible PSUR.

Client contextA manufacturer with an established European device portfolio

01Challenge
  • Complaint, sales exposure and vigilance data were held across different sources.
  • Trend-analysis methods and reporting denominators were inconsistently applied.
  • PSUR conclusions did not fully reconcile with clinical and risk findings.
02What we did
  • Consolidated PMS datasets and standardised analysis assumptions.
  • Prepared complaint-rate, signal and benefit-risk summaries with source traceability.
  • Authored the PSUR and reconciled findings with CER, PMCF and risk records.
03Outcome
  • Completed a structured PSUR and supporting analysis annexes.
  • Established a repeatable cross-functional evidence collection and review cycle.
Case 14 · Post-market

Complaint Handling Process Remediation

Strengthening complaint consistency from intake through closure.

Client contextA manufacturer operating across multiple markets

01Challenge
  • Complaint descriptions and coding varied by business unit.
  • Investigation rationale, escalation rules and closure evidence were inconsistent.
  • Trend reports did not reliably inform CAPA and risk reviews.
02What we did
  • Mapped the complaint lifecycle and revised triage and investigation procedures.
  • Standardised complaint categories, decision trees and documentation templates.
  • Defined escalation, periodic trending and QMS/risk feedback responsibilities.
03Outcome
  • Delivered a controlled complaint-handling workflow and updated records.
  • Improved consistency of investigations and traceability of escalation decisions.
Case 15 · Post-market

Global Vigilance & Reportability Assessment

Harmonising safety-event assessment for multiple regulatory markets.

Client contextAn international medical device organisation

01Challenge
  • Reportability decisions were inconsistently documented across regions.
  • Local reporting timelines and responsibilities were not centrally mapped.
  • Safety events lacked a consistent interface with complaint and CAPA processes.
02What we did
  • Reviewed event-assessment practices against applicable jurisdictional rules.
  • Established reportability decision records, escalation pathways and tracking matrices.
  • Aligned vigilance procedures with complaint handling, PMS and risk management.
03Outcome
  • Completed harmonised vigilance procedures and supporting decision templates.
  • Improved the audit trail for event evaluation and regulatory reporting actions.
Case 16 · Post-market

Integrated PMS, Clinical & Risk Feedback Loop

Connecting recurring surveillance reviews with product lifecycle decisions.

Client contextA manufacturer improving post-market governance

01Challenge
  • PMS, clinical evaluation and risk teams operated with separate review cycles.
  • Emerging signals were not consistently translated into document updates.
  • Ownership of cross-functional safety conclusions was unclear.
02What we did
  • Defined a shared periodic review framework across PMS, risk and clinical functions.
  • Built traceability from complaints/signals to CAPA, clinical and risk decisions.
  • Updated governed review records and escalation/approval responsibilities.
03Outcome
  • Implemented a coordinated PMS review and documentation workflow.
  • Strengthened the linkage between post-market evidence and lifecycle compliance records.
About these case studies

Engagements are anonymised and client names are withheld. Outcomes are described qualitatively unless figures are given. Documents described here were prepared by our specialists; regulatory and certification decisions remain with the authorities and Notified Bodies concerned.

Talk to our experts

Discuss your device, market or audit with a specialist

Share the device, its class and your target markets. A senior specialist will come back with the likely pathway, the evidence gaps we see and a practical plan.

Talk to our experts → Request an AI pilot sales@medoqi.tech · +91 44 4690 0555