Cleared Traditional

K110671 - WINCO STRETCHAIR

K110671 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for WINCO STRETCHAIR, manufactured by Winco Mfg., LLC. The device is a Class 2 Physical Medicine device with product code INK cleared through the Traditional 510(k) pathway after a 44-day FDA review.

Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Apr 2011
Decision
44d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K110671 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the WINCO STRETCHAIR. Classified as Stretcher, Wheeled, Powered (product code INK), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Winco Mfg., LLC (Ocala, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on April 22, 2011 after a review of 44 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Physical Medicine FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 890.3690 - the FDA physical medicine device framework. The Traditional 510(k) pathway establishes clearance through substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, without requiring clinical trial data.

Device pattern: Fast-track predicate clearance. Standard predicate reliance. The short review cycle indicates strong predicate alignment - the FDA found sufficient equivalence without extended technical review.

View all Winco Mfg., LLC devices

FDA 510(k) Submission Details - K110671

510(k) Number K110671 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received March 09, 2011
Decision Date April 22, 2011
Days to Decision 44 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Physical Medicine (PM)
Summary Summary PDF
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
71d faster than avg
Panel avg: 115d · This submission: 44d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

INK Device Classification - Class 2, Special Controls

Product Code INK Stretcher, Wheeled, Powered
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 890.3690
What this classification means

Class II devices require demonstration of substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device. This pathway does not require clinical trials - it relies on engineering equivalence and performance data. Most Physical Medicine devices follow this clearance model.