Dr Rajiv Chandegra
12.12.2024·Healthcare, Technology, Policy, Systems

UK Health Technology Compliance: A Systems Approach

The UK regulatory environment is in significant transition following Brexit and the 2024-2025 MHRA reform programme. CE marking remains accepted until June 2030 for most devices, but companies must prepare for UK-specific requirements including mandatory UK Responsible Person appointment, enhanced post-market surveillance from June 2025, and emerging software/AI-specific pathways.

"Healthcare systems worldwide face a paradox: despite unprecedented investment, outcomes often remain stagnant. The root cause isn't a lack of resources—it's a mismatch between how we think about problems and the nature of the problems themselves."

This framework applies systems thinking to regulatory compliance, transforming what appears as bureaucratic complexity into a navigable, interconnected system.


Phase 1: See the system

Before acting on any compliance requirement, map the interconnections. The UK health technology regulatory landscape comprises five interacting subsystems:

The five regulatory subsystems

MHRA Medical Device Regulations — The foundation governing all medical devices on the Great Britain market. Classification divides devices into four risk classes:

  • Class I — Self-certifiable for basic devices
  • Class IIa/IIb — Moderate risk requiring UK Approved Body assessment
  • Class III — Highest risk with extensive clinical investigation requirements

Mapping the stocks and flows

Using the fundamentals of systems theory, we can identify:

| Element | Examples | Significance | |---------|----------|--------------| | Stocks | Technical documentation, clinical evidence, certifications, relationships | What accumulates over time | | Flows | Application submissions, audit cycles, evidence generation | What moves between stocks | | Feedback loops | MHRA consultations, post-market surveillance, NICE reassessment | How the system responds to itself | | Delays | 8+ month UK Approved Body queues, 12-36 month clinical investigations | Where effects lag behind causes | | Boundaries | GB vs EU markets, device vs non-device classification | What you're including and excluding |

"Most software as medical device (SaMD) currently classified as Class I will be reclassified to minimum Class IIa under forthcoming changes—a system-wide shift requiring proactive response, not reactive compliance."


Phase 2: Diagnose the leverage points

Not all compliance activities are equal. The Chandegra Model prioritises interventions by leverage level.

High leverage: Mindsets and paradigms

The most powerful leverage point is shifting from "compliance as cost" to "compliance as competitive advantage." Companies beginning regulatory planning at concept stage reduce time to market by 30-40% and avoid costly design changes.

Every £1 invested in early MHRA consultation (£987 per hour) generates 50-100x ROI through preventing technical file rework.

Medium leverage: Rules and information flows

Understanding classification rules determines your entire pathway. Device classification follows Annex IX rules based on:

  • Invasiveness and duration of contact
  • Body location and intended purpose
  • Significance of information provided (for software)

Software classification specifically depends on:

  • "Low functionality" (stores/communicates without modification) — Generally not medical devices
  • "High functionality" (AI/ML, personalised recommendations, complex calculations) — Typically medical devices requiring oversight

Lower leverage: Physical stocks and resources

While easiest to measure, simply throwing resources at compliance without understanding system dynamics leads to waste. The key is matching resource allocation to actual bottlenecks.

Current critical bottleneck: UK Approved Body capacity—only seven designated bodies as of 2023, many not accepting new clients, 8+ month waiting lists, and 780% projected workload increase.


Phase 3: Design the pathway

MHRA registration and marking

The UKCA marking requirement eventually replaces CE marking, though CE marked devices remain acceptable until:

  • June 30, 2028 — Legacy devices certified under older directives
  • June 30, 2030 — Devices certified under EU MDR

This extended transition provides strategic flexibility. Most companies maintain CE marking for dual UK/EU market access rather than pursuing UKCA-only routes.

Non-UK manufacturers must appoint a UK Responsible Person who:

  • Registers devices with MHRA (currently £261 per application, transitioning to ~£300 annually per GMDN Level 2 category from April 2026)
  • Maintains technical documentation accessible to MHRA
  • Serves as regulatory liaison for all UK compliance matters

Clinical evaluation requirements

Evidence requirements scale with classification:

| Class | Evidence Requirement | Typical Cost | |-------|---------------------|--------------| | Class I | Literature review, equivalence | £5,000-£15,000 | | Class IIa | Robust clinical data | £15,000-£30,000 | | Class IIb | Comprehensive clinical data | £25,000-£50,000 | | Class III | Clinical investigations | £100,000-£5,000,000+ |

Software and AI pathways

The MHRA Software and AI as Medical Device Change Programme establishes framework for classifying software based on functional impact. The ten Good Machine Learning Practice principles (developed jointly by MHRA, FDA, and Health Canada) emphasise:

  • Multi-disciplinary expertise throughout product lifecycle
  • Representative training data independent from test datasets
  • Focus on human-AI team performance, not standalone algorithm metrics
  • Testing in clinically relevant settings
  • Deployed model monitoring in real-world environments

For adaptive AI systems: Predetermined Change Control Plans (PCCPs) must define bounded modifications, update methodologies, impact assessment procedures, and implementation controls—approved before deployment.

NICE evidence generation

"Sleepio (MTG70) received first-ever digital therapeutic guidance in May 2022 after eight years of evidence generation including twelve RCTs. NICE confirmed Sleepio as clinically effective and cost-saving at £4.52 per person over standard treatment after one year."

From April 2026, NICE technology appraisal programme extends to medical devices, diagnostics, and digital health technologies—placing these on legal parity with medicines. NHS organisations will be legally required to provide funding within three months of positive NICE recommendations.

Early Value Assessment (EVA) offers faster pathway for promising technologies:

  • 3-6 months for initial review
  • 12-24 months for evidence generation with NHS deployment
  • Full NICE guidance upon evidence maturity

NHS Digital Technology Assessment Criteria

DTAC divides into five assessed sections:


Phase 4: Implement with iteration

Quality management foundation

ISO 13485:2016 certification provides the foundation, with 12-24 month implementation timeline:

  1. Preparation (2-3 months)

    Gap analysis, management commitment, and resource allocation.

  2. QMS Development (6-12 months)

    Quality Manual, six mandatory procedures, design controls, and risk management framework.

  3. Internal Readiness (1-3 months)

    Training, internal audits, and minimum three months of records.

  4. Certification Audit (2-4 months)

    Stage 1 documentation review, Stage 2 implementation audit.

Costs scale with organisation size:

Small Companies

Under 10 employees: £5,000-£15,000

Medium Organisations

10-50 employees: £10,000-£25,000

Annual Surveillance

60-70% of initial certification cost

Timeline reality by classification

| Classification | Timeline to Market | Primary Driver | |---------------|-------------------|----------------| | Class I (self-certified) | 6-12 months | Documentation completeness | | Class I (UK Approved Body) | 12-18 months | Sterile/measuring function assessment | | Class IIa | 18-24 months | UK Approved Body review (3-6 months) | | Class IIb | 24-48 months | Clinical investigation (6-18 months) | | Class III | 36-60+ months | Clinical investigation (12-36 months) |

Acceleration strategies

Key Insight

The most common cause of delays is not complexity—it's starting too late. Begin regulatory planning at concept stage, not after development.


Phase 5: Sustain through feedback

Post-market surveillance

From June 2025, enhanced requirements include:

  • Mandatory UK Responsible Person for non-UK manufacturers
  • Strengthened post-market surveillance reporting
  • Vigilance procedures for incidents and complaints
  • Trend analysis and corrective action capability

NHS integration pathways

NHS Spine connectivity provides national infrastructure connecting 44,000+ healthcare IT systems:

  • Personal Demographics Service (92 million patient records)
  • Summary Care Record (65 million patient summaries)
  • Electronic Prescription Service
  • e-Referral Service

FHIR UK Core (STU2 2.0.2) provides standardised profiles across all four UK nations, replacing older Care Connect STU3.

NHS Login integration requires four-stage process averaging four months:

  1. Application to NHS Login Partner Integration Board
  2. Discovery phase with sandpit proof of concept
  3. Integration phase with conformance assessment
  4. Production deployment following clinical safety validation

Case studies: System patterns in action

Sleepio — Eight years to NICE guidance

2014

Founded

Big Health launches with CBT-i digital therapeutic concept.

2016-2020

Evidence Generation

28 published studies including 12 RCTs demonstrating clinical efficacy.

2022

NICE MTG70

First-ever digital therapeutic to receive NICE Medical Technologies Guidance.

2023+

NHS Deployment

Nationwide NHS Scotland deployment; regional NHS England adoption.

System Insight

Eight years from founding to NICE guidance reflects system delays, not inefficiency. Companies must capitalise appropriately (£129M raised) and generate evidence early.

Skin Analytics DERM — From Class I to Class IIa

UKCA CertifiedClass IIaAI/ML DeviceDermatology

First AI medical device for dermatology achieving UKCA certification:

  • Operated as Class I during evidence generation (2020-2022)
  • Upgraded to Class IIa enabling autonomous assessment
  • 24 NHS partnerships, 170,000+ patients — Real-world validation
  • 99.8% negative predictive value for excluding melanoma
  • £86 savings per case with 40% eligible for safe discharge

System Insight

Strategic use of Class I period for evidence generation before Class IIa transition. Understanding reclassification timing creates competitive advantage.

Doccla — CQC registration as differentiation

Traditional View

CQC registration seen as barrier, bureaucratic overhead, and cost centre.

Systems View

CQC registration as differentiation—only tech-enabled virtual ward with full regulatory trust.

Virtual ward platform combining devices, software, logistics, and clinical monitoring:

  • Only CQC-registered tech-enabled virtual ward in UK
  • 50% coverage of NHS Integrated Care Systems
  • £3 saved for every £1 invested (300% ROI)
  • 29% reduction in acute admissions
  • 95%+ patient compliance and satisfaction

Economic system dynamics

Cost structures by classification

| Phase | Class I | Class IIa | Class IIb | Class III | |-------|---------|-----------|-----------|-----------| | Initial market clearance | £15K-£25K | £100K-£200K | £300K-£600K | £1M-£2.5M+ | | Annual maintenance | £2K-£5K | £10K-£20K | £20K-£40K | £40K-£80K+ |

Resource requirements

Minimum viable team for Class IIa device:

  • Regulatory affairs lead (0.5-1 FTE): £30,000-£90,000
  • Quality manager (0.5 FTE): £25,000-£40,000
  • Technical lead (1 FTE): £60,000-£90,000
  • Clinical affairs support (0.25 FTE): £15,000-£30,000
  • Total annual personnel: £150,000-£300,000

Strategic capitalisation

"Success requires early strategic planning, adequate capitalisation at 1.5-2x estimated budgets, and parallel preparation across regulatory, quality, cybersecurity, and clinical evidence domains."

Companies underestimate system complexity at their peril. The 780% projected workload increase on UK Approved Bodies, combined with regulatory transition uncertainty, means timeline contingency is essential—not optional.


Key questions for any health technology

Applying The Chandegra Model to your compliance journey:

  1. What system are you actually in? — Device vs non-device classification determines everything
  2. What are you optimising for? — UK-only, dual UK/EU, or global market access?
  3. What feedback loops are at play? — MHRA consultations, NICE assessment, post-market surveillance
  4. What are the delays? — UK Approved Body queues, clinical investigation timelines, procurement cycles
  5. What would frontline clinicians tell you? — User needs shape evidence requirements and adoption
  6. What unintended consequences might arise? — Reclassification under new rules, NICE negative guidance
  7. How will the system respond? — Competitive landscape, NHS adoption patterns, regulatory evolution
  8. What are you not seeing? — Adjacent requirements (CQC registration, NHS Login, Spine integration)

Resources


Related reading: