FDA just quietly deregulated your wearable

In partnership with

On January 6, FDA quietly published two guidance updates; no announcement. But if you're building a wearable or any software that touches clinical decisions, this changes a lot.

Same month, QMSR replaced Part 820. And the EU AI Act high-risk enforcement is coming in August.

Three regulatory shifts in eight weeks. Here's what each one means for you.

Remember when FDA sent WHOOP a warning letter in 2025 for measuring blood pressure in a wearable? The agency's position was clear: BP in a consumer device is inherently a medical device function. End of discussion.

That position is now reversed.

The revised General Wellness Policy published January 6 explicitly allows noninvasive wearables to estimate blood pressure, blood oxygen, glucose, HRV, and respiratory rate -- and stay outside FDA device regulation. The conditions: the outputs must be framed as wellness (fitness, recovery, stress, energy), the technology must be low-risk and noninvasive, and you make zero diagnostic or clinical management claims.

This is FDA saying: a wrist-worn device that outputs sleep quality, pulse rate, and blood pressure for "activity and recovery" can ship without a 510(k). A ring that tracks SpO2 and heart rate for lifestyle insights -- no clearance needed. Even glucose-related outputs for "metabolic zone" tracking can potentially sit in wellness territory, as long as you're not touching diabetes diagnosis or insulin dosing.

The practical boundaries break down like this:

1) Clearly wellness, no clearance needed: PPG-based HR, HRV, SpO2, BP trends, glucose-related energy scores, sleep stages, readiness, stress -- all framed as lifestyle. No disease claims, no medication guidance, low-risk tech.

2) Still a medical device: anything invasive or implanted, outputs marketed as "clinical-grade" for diagnosis, features integrated into treatment pathways (dosage titration, admission decisions), CGMs used for insulin management.

3) The gray zone: BP or glucose outputs that numerically resemble clinical values but are marketed for wellness. FDA says they expect validation data here, and they'll scrutinize your UX and marketing to make sure you're not doing backdoor clinical positioning.

Samsung Galaxy Ring, Oura, standard WHOOP and Fitbit configurations -- all validated under the new policy as wellness. Apple Watch stays a hybrid: ECG and irregular rhythm notification remain cleared medical device functions, but future BP or glucose features could live in wellness if Apple positions them that way.

However, this doesn't retroactively deregulate devices that already have 510(k) clearance. Bond Ring's FDA-cleared ECG stays a device. Evie Ring's cleared SpO2 stays a device. The new policy expands the safe harbor for future products and repositioned features -- it doesn't undo existing clearances.

For founders building wearables right now, the takeaway is concrete: you can ship richer sensor data to users without a regulatory submission, provided your claims architecture is clean.

The difference between a 510(k) and no 510(k) is now primarily about how you position the product, not what sensors are inside it.

Same day, FDA updated its Clinical Decision Support guidance for the first time since 2022.

The big change: software that produces a single recommendation can now qualify as non-device CDS under enforcement discretion, as long as that single recommendation is the only clinically appropriate option. Previously, FDA required your CDS to present multiple options to preserve the clinician's independent judgment -- even in situations where there was really only one right answer. That forced developers to add artificial choices just to stay unregulated.

That requirement is gone.

If your remote monitoring platform flags a critical reading and recommends one specific action because that's the only appropriate response -- you're no longer automatically a regulated device for doing so. The other CDS criteria still apply: transparency about data sources, professional user interpretation, and the ability for the clinician to understand and review the basis of the recommendation. For anyone building SaMD or clinical workflows around wearable data, this opens real room. You can build higher-utility decision logic without triggering device status -- as long as you architect the transparency and professional-review layers.

Become An AI Expert In Just 5 Minutes

If you’re a decision maker at your company, you need to be on the bleeding edge of, well, everything. But before you go signing up for seminars, conferences, lunch ‘n learns, and all that jazz, just know there’s a far better (and simpler) way: Subscribing to The Deep View.

This daily newsletter condenses everything you need to know about the latest and greatest AI developments into a 5-minute read. Squeeze it into your morning coffee break and before you know it, you’ll be an expert too.

Subscribe right here. It’s totally free, wildly informative, and trusted by 600,000+ readers at Google, Meta, Microsoft, and beyond.

QMSR: Part 820 is dead

On February 2, FDA's new Quality Management System Regulation went into effect. The old Quality System Regulation (21 CFR Part 820) -- the framework that governed medical device manufacturing since 1996 -- is replaced.

QMSR incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference.

If you've been maintaining dual compliance for US and EU markets, this is good news: one QMS can now serve both. If you've only ever built for FDA under Part 820, you have work to do.

The differences that matter:

Risk management under QSR was limited to design validation. Under QMSR, risk-based thinking runs across the entire product lifecycle -- manufacturing, supplier management, post-market surveillance, everything. If your risk management is a design-phase checkbox, it needs to become a living system.

Supplier controls got significantly tighter. QSR required basic evaluation. QMSR requires full qualification and ongoing monitoring of suppliers. For startups that rely on contract manufacturers or source components from multiple vendors, this means documented supplier audits, performance tracking, and quality agreements.

FDA inspections changed the same day. The old QSIT checklist approach is replaced by risk-based inspections under Compliance Program 7382.850. Inspectors will now focus on your ISO 13485 conformity plus FDA-specific requirements like UDI and MDR. The playbook you prepped for your last inspection may not match what the inspector expects next time.

Documentation structure changes too. The old DMR/DHF/DHR framework shifts to Medical Device Files and a formal Quality Manual. The structure of Part 820 collapsed from 15 subparts to two.

If you already run ISO 13485, the transition is straightforward -- align your references, update procedures, verify your documentation maps to the new structure. If you don't, start the gap analysis now.

I wrote extensively about QMS architecture for medical device startups in Hardware Bible -- specifically how to build a quality system that satisfies both FDA and international requirements without drowning in paperwork. If you're staring at a gap analysis right now, it might save you some pain.

EU AI Act: August 2026 is closer than you think

If you're selling AI-enabled devices in Europe -- or planning to -- the EU AI Act high-risk obligations apply from August 2, 2026.

Medical AI is almost always classified as high-risk under the Act. If your AI is a safety component of a device that requires notified body review under MDR or IVDR, you're high-risk. Diagnosis, therapy planning, patient monitoring, ML-based SaMD, deep learning CDS -- all high-risk.

This classification is separate from your MDR/IVDR device class. A Class IIa device with an AI component still needs AI Act compliance on top of MDR conformity.

The practical gap for most medtech companies: you probably have solid MDR documentation but almost certainly don't have AI-specific technical files covering training data provenance, bias assessment, and explainability architecture.

That's the work to start now.

Real-World Evidence: FDA finalized the guidance

FDA published its final RWE guidance for medical devices in December 2025, replacing the 2017 version. The 60-day transition ended February 17.

The biggest change: FDA no longer requires identifiable patient-level data for every submission.

De-identified aggregate data from registries, EHRs, or claims databases can now support premarket submissions, postmarket surveillance, and labeling changes.

For 510(k) specifically, RWE works well for modifications to indications, instructions for use, or technical parameters. FDA has already accepted RWE in over 250 prior 510(k) submissions -- scalp cooling systems using Dutch registry data, occlusion catheters using the AORTA registry, among others.

Quick signals

Novocure got FDA approval on February 12 for Optune Pax -- a portable, wearable tumor treating fields device for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. First new treatment option in this setting in nearly three decades. Used with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel.

Proscia swept KLAS digital pathology ratings -- highest US performance score (95.2) and first vendor to earn top KLAS recognition in both US and Europe in the same year for digital pathology. Concentriq platform. Worth watching if you're in the digital pathology or AI diagnostics space.

Danaher is buying Masimo for approximately $9.9 billion ($180/share cash). Patient monitoring and diagnostics portfolio expansion. Expected to close second half of 2026.

Medtronic diabetes spinoff is on track -- preferred IPO plus split-off structure, targeting completion by late 2026. The new company will focus on intensive insulin management (AID systems and smart MDI), competing directly with Abbott, Dexcom, Insulet, and Tandem as an independent pure-play.

If you're navigating any of these regulatory changes and need engineering support -- from concept through FDA -- book 30 minutes with me.

If you want the full playbook for building medical devices from scratch -- regulatory strategy, QMS, manufacturing, the works -- Hardware Bible is on Amazon.

Lisa

Founder & CEO, OVA Solutions

No Mercy MedTech is a bi-weekly newsletter for engineers, founders, and investors who build medical devices. Subscribe if someone forwarded this to you.