ISO 13485 Compliance Software for Medical Device Q | Kintavo
← ALL FRAMEWORKS
COMPLIANCE COVERAGE

{{ c.h1 }}

{{ c.sub }}

{{ chip }}
THE PROBLEM

The Standard Asks for a System. Most Companies Maintain a Binder.

ISO 13485 certification is won with a paper QMS and kept — barely — through surveillance audits that sample the seams: the SOP revision nobody trained on, the complaint trend that never reached CAPA, the supplier re-evaluation that was really a calendar reminder. Each cycle, the findings list grows, and the quality manual describes a system that daily work quietly contradicts.

With FDA’s QMSR incorporating the standard and MDSAP auditing it across five jurisdictions at once, the gap between the documented system and the operating one has never been more expensive.

WHAT THE STANDARD REQUIRES

What ISO 13485:2016 Requires, Clause by Clause

Clause 4.2: documented, controlled records and documents. Clause 5.6: management review with defined inputs and recorded outputs. Clause 6.2: competence established, training effective. Clause 7.3: design and development with controlled changes. Clause 7.4: supplier evaluation proportionate to risk, monitored and re-evaluated. Clause 8: feedback, complaint handling, nonconformance, CAPA — connected, with records for all of it.

Kintavo maps the clause structure to workflows that generate the records as work happens — so the quality manual and the operation are the same system, and surveillance audits sample a machine that is actually running.

WHAT AUDITORS LOOK FOR
Documents in use that differ from the controlled version — clause 4.2’s classic finding.
Complaint trends never analyzed into CAPA — the 8.2/8.5 seam.
Supplier re-evaluations with no criteria, no data, no decision — 7.4 as a formality.
Management review minutes with no actions, or actions with no follow-up.
WHAT KINTAVO REPLACES
A quality manual describing intent → Workflows that generate the required records
Training lagging document changes → Revision-triggered training before work proceeds
Complaints in a standalone log → Feedback trending into CAPA per clause 8
Supplier files reviewed annually → Live monitoring with risk-based re-evaluation
Management review as a slideshow → Defined inputs generated from live data
CORE CAPABILITIES

The Clause Structure, Running.

Document & Record Control (4.2)
Versioned, approved, distributed — with obsolete versions locked out and records retained per your schedule.
Training & Competence (6.2)
Role-based requirements with effectiveness evaluation and revision-triggered assignments.
Design Records (7.3)
Design documents, reviews, and changes under control, linked to risk files per ISO 14971.
Supplier Controls (7.4)
Risk-classed evaluation, live approved list, scorecards, and scheduled re-evaluation with criteria.
Nonconformance & CAPA (8.3, 8.5)
Events dispositioned under authority; CAPA with root cause and verified effectiveness.
Management Review (5.6)
Inputs — audits, feedback, CAPA status, trends — assembled from live data with actions tracked.
WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE IN PRACTICE

The notified body’s surveillance audit lands on clause 7.4. The auditor asks for the supplier re-evaluation process: the quality manager opens the ASL — every supplier shows its risk class, last evaluation, scorecard, and next re-evaluation date. The auditor samples one: certificate current, two receiving rejections trended, re-evaluation completed on schedule with documented criteria and a signed retention decision. One clause, zero findings, eleven minutes.

EVIDENCE, NOT CLAIMS

Surveillance Audits Sample a Running System.

The auditor picks a clause and pulls a thread: the record exists because the workflow created it, current, signed, and linked to its neighbors. Findings stop coming from the seams, because the seams are joins.

A controlled change record with impact assessment — clause-level evidence generated by the workflow
SHOWN WITH SAMPLE DATA. YOUR NUMBERS APPEAR THE DAY YOU CONNECT YOUR SYSTEM.

Covered as architecture — not configured after the fact.

{{ p.tag }}
{{ p.title }}
{{ p.desc }}
MODULES THAT CARRY THE LOAD
{{ m.name }}→
WHO WORKS UNDER IT
{{ i.name }}→ Check your readiness in 3 minutes →
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

ISO 13485 FAQ

Does Kintavo map to ISO 13485 clauses?
Yes — workflows are organized against the clause structure, so audit evidence pulls by clause: 4.2 documents, 7.4 suppliers, 8.5 CAPA, 5.6 management review.
Does this help with the FDA QMSR transition?
Directly — the QMSR incorporates ISO 13485, so a QMS running on the standard’s structure is the transition. Sites on Kintavo run the 13485 process model already.
Can Kintavo support MDSAP audits?
The MDSAP audit model samples the same processes across jurisdictions; live, linked records serve the single audit the same way they serve each regulator individually.
How long to get audit-ready?
Implementation runs 8–12 weeks; certification readiness depends on your procedures’ maturity. Existing certified systems migrate their document structure and records without re-approval.

{{ c.cta }}

Book a Personalized Demo