[Back to Validation Online]

Talk Validation Online.

 

Post a new message

 

Installing a non-validated application on a server with a validated app

Posted by: (James) - 12/11/2009

Hello,BRBRI have a validated ECM application installed on a server. The client wants to install another (non-validated) version on the same server. Will this affect the validation of the existing ECM app? Would perfoming an impact analysis to demonstrate no change to the validated state be enough or is there additional testing that is required?

  

Replies

 

(Alex Kennedy) You would have to raise a VP and in it document your approach to this problem. Then arrive at a conclusion that justifies and documents the action you plan to take to verify that the existing app has not been compromised.
I would think that if this app has been fully validated (DQ to PQ) then a supplementary protocol could be raise to document that the installation has not been affected by the newer (un-validated) installed program.
Your server of course must be validated.(DQ to PQ)
Alex

 

Notice

Posted by: (Alex Kennedy) - 12/10/2009

This notice board is not attached to our website now.BRPlease go toBRwww.validation-online.netBR

 

Do we need OQ for similar equipments

Posted by: (Laurent) - 12/10/2009

In case of a group of similar equipments (say 5 idientical ones), can we proceed with OQ for one equipment only (knowing the function are exactly the sames) or should we proceed to OQ for all?BRAny reference in the litterature?BRBRThanksBR

  

Replies

 

(Alex Kennedy) Validation is specific; in as much as the protocols must carry details of the testing/inspection of each indevidual piece of equipment or system. Where you have many items all identical (such as network terminals) you can raise a table and list the checks in groups.
Legally you must give for each test a;
Rationale for the test.
A test Method.
An acceptance criteria.
A test result.
There must be a signature or a minimum of initials for each test (ticks are not acceptable).
If can do it in a table format, think what will happen when you change one part of the system.
You will have to update validation documentation affecting many other parts.
So often it is much easier just to have individual documents.
Alex

 

Autoclave Validation

Posted by: (J) - 9/23/2009

Fantastic website - I have one simple question. We manufacture sterile products and l would like to know how often the autoclave cycle require validation. We currently validate annually?? Is this too much?BRBRThanking you in advance.

 

Mr.

Posted by: (Buddy) - 4/15/2009

Does anyone have a protocol to test a hotplate stirrer? would just placing a stir bar on the surface qualify as an acceptable test or would it have to be in a beaker in solution?

 

autoclave validation

Posted by: (j.mani kanta chary) - 2/16/2009

dear sir is USFDA speeking any thing regarding use of number of thermococuples

 

number of thermocouples requried during autoclave validation

Posted by: (j.mani kanta chary) - 2/16/2009

dear sir please can u provide me a information regarding the number of thermocouples to be used during autoclave validation.

 

retrospective validation

Posted by: (vasu) - 1/21/2009

How to validate the Existing system.BRBRHow to prepare URS, FS, IQ and DS for already implemented softwaresBRBRHow to validate and implement the predicate rule transactions

  

Replies

 

(Alex Kennedy) Retrospective Validation
Nearly all countries have a regulatory authority which oversees the production of medical products, those that do not, usually recognise other authorities such as the FDA. In this regulated field there is never a good enough excuse for manufacturing regulated product (including batches for human trials), using none validated equipment, utilities, facilities and or processes.

Prior to an Installation Qualification (IQ) being executed for a piece of equipment, it is required to be comprehensively tested in the vendor’s establishment, by the execution of a Factory Acceptance Test (FAT), this is followed, once on site, by the execution of a Site Acceptance Test (SAT) which is integrated with the site commissioning. You must not be making adjustments or alterations to settings during IQ or OQ, these should all have been completed in the SAT/commissioning phase.

The build history of equipment and software is essential, because during IQ execution, you may have to review it, and assess the equipment / software quality, from it.

Retrospective validation has to be justified, and this justification is usually given in a Validation Plan (VP), which then becomes your authority to validate. In this VP you document your justification, along with the subsequent action you intend to take. You detail the scope and the responsibilities for all the proposed validation activities. You then get the company senior managers to approve it.

Some acceptable reasons for retrospective validation;
Your product was directed at home market, now you want to expand to a FDA controlled market.
Product line was stopped, now you want to restart.
Your company practices and procedures state that all validation will be reviewed at (1,2,3,) yearly intervals.
Legislation has changed.
The original validation was found to be inadequate.
Recommendation from a reviewing consultant has led to your decision to revalidate.

Whatever the reason get it documented in a VP.

Remember validation is completed using a series of documents each one as important as the next one. Get the sequence in place and validation becomes orderly, simple, robust and most importantly compliant.

VP - URS – DQ – VRA – IQ – OQ – PQ

Alex Kennedy
www.validation-online.net

 

GxP Assessments

Posted by: (duane) - 1/15/2009

I work for a small medical device company. We are using several programs that need to be assessed to determine whether or not they are GxP. One is an OCR program and the other 3 are more or less "tools" for editing documents (SOPs) BRBRMy initial thought is that they are non-GxP. What the best ways to make the best possible assement of these systems.

 

Mister

Posted by: (Mark) - 9/26/2008

Objective Evidence for Computer Validation - I have looked through every regulation I can find, and the reference to objective evidence for Computer Validation is that you need to have it. I have also done external research, and the claim is that objective evidence needs to be documented. My question is, if you document user reqt's, functional reqt's, design specs, IQ/OQ/PQ and test scripts address each requirement and indicate P/F, and approved and accepted, is this enough? I have been told that "screen shots" for every step have to be included as well as the testing log. Is this really necessary?? Thank You, Mark

  

Replies

 

(Hari) Mark,

You need to take an objective evidence for the end results that would support the realization of the requirement the application is built on & not for every step. For e.g. if the requirement for label print is to print only 2 labels at a prompt, your screen shot or evidence should show the delivery of 2 labels only and not all the unit details you enter in order to have the print out. This is more so when you purchase COTS product and test only for your business requirements. The testing log is neccessary.

 

Page 1 of 5

Next Page >>