Skip to content
‹ Back to IndustriesHealthcare

DESIGN TRANSFER: A PROCESS NOT A SINGULAR EVENT

In the development process for medical devices, there comes a point when products transfer from design to production. Often this step doesn’t go as smoothly as it should and the project budget and schedule are adversely impacted. Companies may view design transfer as a one-time event, rather than an essential part of an ongoing process….

This story was produced through MarketScale. See how Healthcare teams put it to work with Executive Thought Leadership.

·
Share

Free workspace

Turn your Healthcare expertise into content.

Record interviews, organize footage, and write with AI on a free trial of the MarketScale platform for qualifying companies. No demo required, no credit card.

Try it Free

In the development process for medical devices, there comes a point when products transfer from design to production. Often this step doesn’t go as smoothly as it should and the project budget and schedule are adversely impacted. Companies may view design transfer as a one-time event, rather than an essential part of an ongoing process.

During the product development process, the Research and Development (R&D) team is under a tight deadline. They may not have the necessary resources or take sufficient time to create proper documentation. Team members may need to make decisions quickly without fully considering how they could take proactive steps to ensure design transfer will go more smoothly. Subject matter experts on the team may only focus on critical design decisions required to make the product work, without regard for manufacturing. Let’s take a look at some ways to improve design transfer.

Look at Design Transfer as a Process Rather than a Single Event

Design transfer is an integral part of the product development process, from conception through final manufacture. Highly reliable, cost-efficient medical devices require proper design transfer, and that starts with Design for Manufacturability (DFM) and Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DFMA). In DFM and DFMA the focus is not only on the design itself, but also on the assembly method, ensuring manufacturing readiness for building Beta units, pre-production clinical units, and the pilot program. When the R&D team considers these factors and performs in-process testing, it can significantly improve product quality and reduce the overall cost of manufacturing.

Using DFMA 

The goal of DFMA is simple: to transfer product design into viable, robust production methods. To succeed, the team must establish and maintain procedures that ensure the device design translates into production specifications, including final test acceptance. The transfer should negate and/or identify remaining risks such as single-sourcing, long lead items, build timelines, and line/tooling capacity.

A Design Ready for Transfer:

  • Can be built reliably using known and proven manufacturing and assembly processes
  • Includes supporting cell/line qualifications through manufacturing validations such as Operational Qualification (OQ) and Performance Qualification (PQ)
  • Specifies and documents any inspection aids, assembly fixtures, and custom tools required for manufacture
  • Confirms completed agency testing and production target hardware meets regulatory requirements such as FDA, UL, and CE
  • Includes a complete product Bill of Material (BOM) that has been fully costed up to the customer Stock Keeping Unit (SKU) level
  • Includes packaging, labeling, and Instructions for Use (IFU)

At Sunrise Labs, we see Design Transfer as an integral process beginning early in the life of a product with many crucial steps for success. Communication between key stakeholders early and often is critical to turn innovative ideas into commercial medical devices.

Read more at sunriselabs.com

Your experts belong here

Every story in MarketScale Healthcare starts with a company putting its clinicians, service-line leaders, and field engineers on the record. Buyers are already reading this topic. The only question is whose experts they find.

Service-line buyers vet vendors quietly, and your clinicians become the proof they find while doing it.

Book DemoSee how it works15 minutes, straight to a calendar.
B2B Weekly

The week in Healthcare, and sixteen other industries, every Monday.

Ten stories, one-line takes, five minutes. Free.

Healthcare: are you visible to AI?

Before they reach out, Healthcare buyers ask AI engines which vendors to trust. Explore how your experts, customers, and partners can become useful content for buyers and AI search.

Free Trial

You just read one Healthcare expert. Your company is full of them.

This article was produced through MarketScale. The same platform turns your clinicians, service-line leaders, and field engineers into the articles, video, and social content Healthcare buyers are searching for. Start a free trial and see it with your own people. For qualifying companies, no credit card, no demo required.

NPS +73 · 1,000+ creators · 38+ countries

What your free trial includes

Hands-on access to the MarketScale platform
Media requests to your crowd, remote recording, AI writing tools
No demo required. No credit card.
For qualifying companies. Company confirmation required.

More Healthcare Insights

Black Book: AI may make some outsourced health plan work cheaper to bring in-house

Black Book: AI may make some outsourced health plan work cheaper to bring in-house

U.S. health plan administrative costs rose 2.7% to about $69.2 billion in the first half of 2026, even as margins improved to 4.1%. Black Book Research's 2027 outlook says AI is starting to move payer sourcing in both directions. Demand for specialist vendors stays strong in some functions, while automation could make in-house or hybrid models viable in others. The report recommends comparing each major outsourced service with rival vendors and the best internal or hybrid option, and checking whether projected savings become actual cash.

  • 01Every major outsourced payer service should be benchmarked against a rival vendor and against the plan's best feasible internal or hybrid model, a three-way contest at each renewal.
  • 02Avoided vacancies, projected productivity gains and payment recoveries are not recurring cash, so outsourcing savings should not be assumed to fund AI until the service, AI and funding cases each stand on their own.
  • 03Provider data sits on both sides of the sourcing question: it is a top pain point and a specialist-demand area, yet also one of the functions where automation could make hybrid or in-house models viable.

Nov 11, 2026

Hugh Chatham surgical tech program draws 65 for 12 seats

Hugh Chatham surgical tech program draws 65 for 12 seats

Hugh Chatham Health and Alleghany Health marked one year with Advocate Health as a surgical technology program drew 65 applicants for 12 seats. An anniversary release lists $11.3 million in pay and rewards and a $19.3 million capital figure, and says nearly 1,000 patients were connected to specialty and higher-acuity services through Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist. Local training seats look like the next limit in Elkin.

  • 01In rural North Carolina, a new surgical technology program drew more than five applicants per seat, which points to training capacity, not interest, as the thing to expand.
  • 02Pay and rewards totaled $11.3 million in year one, versus a $19.3 million capital figure—about 58% as large, by MarketScale’s arithmetic.
  • 03Nearly 1,000 patients were connected to specialty and higher-acuity services versus just over 70 virtual consultations and encounters (about 14:1 by MarketScale’s arithmetic), with expanded virtual care planned for year two.

Nov 10, 2026

Study: AI draft echo reports cut cardiologist time 46%

Study: AI draft echo reports cut cardiologist time 46%

Late-breaking research presented November 9 at the American Heart Association's Scientific Sessions 2026 reported that AI-drafted preliminary echocardiogram reports were comparable to human drafts. Cardiologists averaged 4.6 minutes finalizing AI drafts versus 8.5 minutes without AI. The findings are a non-peer-reviewed abstract.

  • 01Cardiologists averaged 4.6 minutes finalizing AI-drafted echo reports versus 8.5 minutes without AI, about 46% less time.
  • 02Cardiologists made substantial changes to 50.6% of AI drafts and 49.7% of human drafts.
  • 03The research used 1,200 echocardiograms from 21 Kaiser Permanente Northern California medical centers.

Nov 9, 2026

Explore More Healthcare Insights

Read more expert perspectives from across Healthcare.

Browse Healthcare Hub

For B2B teams

Your experts could be publishing here

Stories like this one run on content MarketScale captures from real practitioners. See how your team's expertise becomes coverage in Healthcare and beyond.

Book a Demo

Or call us. No forms required. We pick up. 214-945-2512