Do We Need a User Manual for Our Software as a Medical Device?


We’re developing a mobile app which will be a medical device. We’re wondering whether we have to provide a user manual for it, keeping in mind that most (non - medical device) apps on the market don’t have user manuals and nobody reads user manuals anyway. Some consultants even told us we need a user manual printed on paper which we send to users. What the hell?

Short Answer

Our recommended strategy for MDR class I and IIa would be this:

  • Have an electronic user manual which is accessible in your app by e.g. linking to your website which hosts an up-to-date (html / pdf) user manual.
  • Do a thorough usability test whether users can actually use your software without reading the manual beforehand and document that as well.
  • Add an entry to your risk analysis that users will likely use your software without reading the manual and list your usability test as risk control measure with (hopefully) great effectiveness, based on the (hopefully positive) outcome of that test. Also document a risk assessment for why an electronic provision of your instructions for use is sufficient compared to a paper-based version (yes, sorry for that).

Long Answer

For most of 2021, there was a lot of different regulatory paperwork out there:

  1. the old EU regulation 207/2012 on instructions for use for medical devices under MDD
  2. draft for a new EU regulation that was finally adopted in December 2021, final version here
  3. the new MDR (regulation 2017/745) and its provisions on instructions for use,
  4. the guidance document MDCG 2021-24 which actually deals with classification of medical devices under the MDR but also mentions instructions for use.

Old Regulation: Paper Is a Must.

In greatly simplified terms and ignoring a ton of important details, according to 207/2012, you always need a paper-based user manual by default, especially if your device is used by patients.

The old 2012 regulation only allowed electronic manuals if used by “professionals”, and manufacturers had to create a ton of documentation for that.

The New Draft: Paperless But Still a Headache.

It’s been a long time coming: Finally, there’s a number of exceptions from the rule and software is generally exempt from the paper form.

Article 3, Para. 3:

For software covered by Regulation (EU) 2017/745, manufacturers may provide instructions for use in electronic form by means of the software itself instead of in paper form.

That means: Arguing for paperless will be easier, but the burden of documentation remains. Manufacturers are required to conduct a thorough risk assessment regarding the electronic user manual, considering the knowledge of their users, characteristics of the use environment, impact of unavailability of a user manual, etc.

And nevertheless, manufacturers will be required to provide users with a paper copy if requested (Art. 5, Para. 3). That sounds ridiculous and let’s hope that nobody will ever use your contact form for such a request.

MDR and MDCG 2021-24: Do We Need a Manual At All?

The General Safety and Performance Requirements (Annex I) of the MDR state in Chapter 3:

By way of exception, instructions for use shall not be required for class I and class IIa devices if such devices can be used safely without any such instructions and unless otherwise provided for elsewhere in this section.

Similarly, MDCG 2021-24 Para. 2.6 states:

Generally, instructions for use must be supplied together with the device. By way of exception, class I and IIa devices may be supplied without instructions for use if such devices can safely be used without the instructions and no other provisions of Annex I Section 23 state otherwise.

Does that mean the days of 100 pages of user manual work are numbered?

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. First, the MDCG states “supplied together with”, essentially saying “even if you write a manual, you may not have to ship it alongside your device”. This is already cool as, for class I and IIa devices, you can opt to not supply instructions for use with the device but instead make them available somewhere in case users actually want to read them.

Now, let’s not forget: instructions for use may help manufacturers as a (legal) safety net and as part of device risk mitigation measures. In order to omit instructions for use altogether, you will probably need to develop a bunch of warnings and notifications in your software. Depending on your device, it might be easier to throw all these legal and regulatory disclaimers into one document that is easier to maintain than dozens of different features.

The decision is ultimately up to you. Our initially suggested approach goes again as follows: Have an electronic user manual and create some proof that your device can be used safely without it (= usability tests). Again, assuming you’re MDR class I or IIa. In any case and as always, you will need to document a reasoning to show to your auditor if they ever ask about your instructions for use. Good luck! 🙂

What About In-Vitro Devices?

Note: all of those alleviated requirements above only apply for MDD/MDR devices. So what about IVDD/IVDR? You can find exceptions for IVDR devices spelled out in annex I, chapter III, paragraph 20.1, lit. d) and f):

d) Instructions for use shall be provided together with devices. However, in duly justified and exceptional cases instructions for use shall not be required or may be abbreviated if the device can be used safely and as intended by the manufacturer without any such instructions for use.

f) When the device is intended for professional use only, instructions for use may be provided to the user in non-paper format (e.g. electronic), except when the device is intended for near-patient testing.

If you choose to go with any of these exceptional clauses, again, bear in mind to consider this in your risk management file. Finally, MEDDEV 2.14/3 rev.1 describes requirements under which you could simply provide your manual on your website. Those basic requirements entail formatting and data security. For more information, see paragraph 5.3 of the guidance document.


Leave the first comment