January 22, 2026
Understanding the Critical Difference Between Software Lifecycle and Product Validation
As Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) continues to dominate digital health innovation, regulatory scrutiny on software development and validation has intensified. One of the most common and costly regulatory mistakes in SaMD submissions is misunderstanding the difference between IEC 62304 and IEC 82304-1.
At Maven Regulatory Solutions, we frequently see delayed approvals, additional questions, and even non-conformities arising from incorrect application of these two standards.
This guide clearly explains IEC 62304 vs IEC 82304-1, when each applies, and how they work together to meet global regulatory expectations in 2025–2026.
Why IEC 62304 vs IEC 82304-1 Matters in 2026
Global regulators including FDA, EU Notified Bodies, MHRA, TGA, and SFDA now expect clear separation between software verification and product validation, especially for standalone software.
Key drivers in 2026:
- Increased SaMD approvals and post-market surveillance
- Stronger focus on usability engineering and real-world use
- Alignment with ISO 13485, ISO 14971, and IEC 62366-1
- Rising cybersecurity and lifecycle management expectations
Failing to apply the correct standard at the correct level can result in:
- Regulatory questions or refusal to accept submissions
- Gaps in validation evidence
- Delays in CE marking or FDA clearance
IEC 62304 Explained: The Software Lifecycle Standard
IEC 62304 = “The Engine” (How the Software Is Built)
IEC 62304 defines how medical software is developed, maintained, and controlled throughout its lifecycle.
Scope of IEC 62304
- Embedded medical software
- Standalone medical software
- SaMD components
- Software within hardware medical devices
What IEC 62304 Covers
- Software development planning
- Software architecture and design
- Coding and unit testing
- Software risk management (linked to ISO 14971)
- Software verification and maintenance
Regulatory Goal
Verification
“Did we build the software correctly?”
IEC 82304-1 Explained: The Health Software Product Standard
IEC 82304-1 = “The Car” (The Finished Product)
IEC 82304-1 focuses on the overall health software product, not just the code.
Scope of IEC 82304-1
- Standalone health software
- Software as a Medical Device (SaMD)
- Mobile medical applications
- Cloud-based diagnostic or monitoring software
What IEC 82304-1 Covers
- System-level requirements
- Intended use and clinical purpose
- Usability and user interaction
- Labeling, IFU, and user manuals
- Safety, effectiveness, and performance validation
Regulatory Goal
Validation
“Did we build the right product for the intended user?”
IEC 62304 vs IEC 82304-1: Side-by-Side Comparison
|
Aspect |
IEC 62304 |
IEC 82304-1 |
|
Focus |
Software lifecycle process |
Health software product |
|
Level |
Code and development |
System and user level |
|
Key Objective |
Verification |
Validation |
|
Applies To |
All medical software |
Standalone software / SaMD |
|
Covers Labeling & IFU |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers Usability |
No |
Yes |
|
Regulatory Expectation |
Mandatory |
Mandatory for SaMD |
When Do You Need IEC 62304 Only?
Example: Embedded Software
- Ventilators
- Infusion pumps
- Imaging systems
In these cases:
- IEC 62304 covers software lifecycle
- Hardware and system validation are addressed via device-level standards
- IEC 82304-1 is not required
When Do You Need BOTH Standards?
Example: Standalone Software / SaMD
- Diagnostic mobile apps
- AI-based clinical decision support software
- Cloud-based patient monitoring platforms
For SaMD:
- IEC 62304 ensures the software code is safe
- IEC 82304-1 ensures the product is usable, validated, and fit for purposes.
Skipping IEC 82304-1 creates a validation gap, which regulators consistently flag.
How Regulators Assess IEC 62304 and 82304-1 in 2026
|
Regulatory Area |
Expectation |
|
FDA |
Lifecycle + system validation evidence |
|
EU MDR |
SaMD validation and usability proof |
|
UK MHRA |
Standalone software safety & performance |
|
Global |
Traceability from code → user outcome |
Common Compliance Mistakes to Avoid
- Treating IEC 62304 as sufficient for SaMD
- Missing usability validation and labeling controls
- Poor traceability between software risks and user risks
- Incomplete validation rationale in regulatory submissions
How Maven Regulatory Solutions Supports SaMD Compliance
Maven Regulatory Solutions helps organizations:
- Map IEC 62304 and IEC 82304-1 requirements correctly
- Build compliant SaMD documentation packages
- Align software lifecycle with regulatory strategy
- Prepare audit-ready verification and validation evidence
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Is IEC 82304-1 mandatory for SaMD?
Yes. Regulators expect system-level validation beyond code verification.
Can IEC 62304 replace IEC 82304-1?
No. They address different regulatory objectives.
Does IEC 82304-1 include cybersecurity?
Yes, at the product and user-risk level.
Do AI-based SaMD require both standards?
Yes, along with additional AI governance considerations.
Conclusion
Understanding the difference between IEC 62304 and IEC 82304-1 is essential for successful SaMD approvals in 2026. One ensures your software is built correctly; the other ensures your product works safely for real users.
For standalone software, both standards are not optional, they are complementary and mandatory.
Post a comment