Barriers to Adopting Agile Practices When Developing Medical Device Software

Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 290)


Agile methodologies such as XP and Scrum are founded upon the four values and twelve principles of agile software development. A software development project is only considered to be truly agile if these values and principles are followed. However, software developed for use in medical devices must be regulatory compliant and this can make the process of following a single agile methodology such as XP difficult to achieve. This paper outlines how we identified the barriers to agile adoption in the medical device software domain through performing a survey. These barriers include: lack of documentation; maintaining traceability; regulatory compliance; lack of up front planning and the process of managing multiple releases. Based on this research recommendations are also made as to how these barriers can be overcome.


Safety Critical Agile Plan Driven XP Scrum Barriers Medical 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abraham, C., Nishiharas, E., Akiyama, M.: Transforming healthcare with information technology in Japan: A review of policy, people, and progress. International Journal of Medical Informatics 80(2011), 157–170 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ge, X., Paige, R.F., McDermid, J.A.: An Iterative Approach for Development of Safety-Critical Software and Safety Arguments. In: Agile 2010, pp. 35–43. IEEE, Orlando (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    VersionOne, State of Agile Survey - The Stage of Agile Development (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4. (accessed February 20, 2012)
  5. 5.
    Turk, D., France, R.: Assumptions Underlying Agile Software Development Processes. Journal of Database Management 16(4), 62–87 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cawley, O., Wang, X., Richardson, I.: Lean/Agile Software Development Methodologies in Regulated Environments – State of the Art. In: Abrahamsson, P., Oza, N. (eds.) LESS 2010. LNBIP, vol. 65, pp. 31–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    European Council, Directive 2007/47/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 September 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    European Commission, Medical Devices Guidance Document - Qualification and Classification of stand alone software MEDDEV 2.1/6 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    FDA, Title 21–Food and Drugs Chapter I –Food and Drug Administration Department of Health and Human Services subchapter h–Medical Devices part 820 Quality System Regulation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2007) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    FDA, General Principles of Software Validation: Final Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff, Centre for Devices and Radiological Health (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    FDA, Federal Register 73(31), 8637 (February 15, 2011) Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    FDA, Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    FDA, Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration - Mobile Device Applications, Centre for Devices and Radiological Health (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    FDA, Guidance for Industry, FDA Reviewers and Compliance on Off-The-Shelf Software use in Medical Devices, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    AAMI, ANSI/AAMI/IEC 62304, Medical device Software - Software life cycle processes (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    European Council, Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under the directive) (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rottier, P.A., Rodrigues, V.: Agile Development in a Medical Device Company. In: Proceedings of the 11th AGILE Conference, AGILE 2008. Springer, Girona (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rasmussen, R., Hughes, T., Jenks, J.R., Skach, J.: Adopting Agile in an FDA Regulated Environment. In: Agile Conference, AGILE 2009, pp. 151–155. Springer, Chicago (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Spence, J.W.: There has to be a better way! [software development]. In: Proceedings to Agile Conference, pp. 272–278. Springer, Denver (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heeager, L.T., Nielsen, P.A.: Agile Software Development and its Compatibility with a Document-Driven Approach? A Case Study. In: 20th Australasian Conference on Information Systems Compatibility of Agile and Document-Driven Approaches, Melbourne (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Martin, R.C.: Agile Software Development - Principles, Patterns and Practices. Prentice Hall (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vogel, D.: Agile Methods:Most are not ready for prime time in medical device software design and development. Design Fax Online (July 2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Berard, E.V.: Misconceptions of the Agile Zealots. In: Software and System Process Improvement Network (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lee, C., Guadagno, L., Jia, X.: An Agile Approach to Capturing Requirements and Traceability. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering (TEFSE 2003), Canada (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    AAMI, Gudiance on the use of agile practices in the development of medical device software TIR-Master_4-00. Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Paetsch, F., Eberlein, A., Maurer, F.: Requirements engineering and agile software development. In: Proceedings of Twelfth IEEE International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises, WET ICE 2003, pp. 308–313 (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Berczu, S., Cowham, R., Appleton, B.: An Agile Approach to Release Management (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28. (accessed January 12, 2012)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Regulated Software Research Group, Department of Computing and MathematicsDundalk Institute of Technology & LeroDundalk Co.Ireland

Personalised recommendations