|
|
 |

11th March 2004, 07:57 AM
|
 |
Involved - Posts
Registration Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Age: 54
|
|
Posts: 103
Thanks Given to Others: 20
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
Karma Power: 38 Karma: 186  
|
|
Visual status of finished goods
Hi
We have an issue with the visual status of finished goods.
We manufacture sterilised alcohols in 1 & 5 litre bottles, IMS and IPA. These bottles are packaged into sales units of 4 or 6 bottles into a cardboard case.
These sales units are palletised and sent for irradiation. Upon return for irradiation the pallets are sent to our Finished Goods Warehouse.
The product is then inspected by the use of a sampling plan.
All the pallets are broken down and each individual case is stamped "QC Approved".
This task is very labour intensive and time consuming.
I do not see the reason for this activity.
We clearly have documented procedures for inspection after irradiation and supporting inspection records.
I would like to cease this activity (a result of an over zealous auditor ) .
Any comments, concerning cGMP?
__________________
Regards,
Denis
|

11th March 2004, 09:42 AM
|
 |
Inactive Registered Visitor
Registration Date: Aug 2001
Location: USA
|
|
Posts: 417
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Karma Power: 50
|
|
You can identify when "final inspection" takes place in your process. I'm assuming that PRIOR to irradiation you perfrom some kind of final inspection, right? If the irradiation process (which I admit I don't know that much about) simply PERMEATES the skids of material but doesn't impact it in any other way, I think you could make a case that your final inspection was prior to the irradiation, and that the only other inspection that might be necessary is a visual inspection of the skids once they return from irradiation for any obvious handling damage.
Just IMHO, of course.
|

11th March 2004, 09:58 AM
|
 |
qualitas ad nauseam
Registration Date: Sep 2003
Location: Saginaw, Michigan
Age: 50
|
|
Posts: 653
Thanks Given to Others: 3
Thanked 34 Times in 15 Posts
Karma Power: 79
|
|
Another question is, how does one know that the material has went through irradiation? How do you identify processing status, other than the QC stamp?
__________________
Rob - The sum of anecdotes is not data. -Roger Brinner
|

11th March 2004, 10:19 AM
|
 |
Involved - Posts
Registration Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Age: 54
|
|
Posts: 103
Thanks Given to Others: 20
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
Karma Power: 38 Karma: 186  
|
|
The supplier who provides us with the irradiation process applies an in process batch code ( for their own Quality system purposes), this batch code label turns red once irradiated.
They also supply us with a certificate of irradiation as proof, again we audit their Quality system as part of our approved supplier assessment on an annual basis.
__________________
Regards,
Denis
|

11th March 2004, 12:39 PM
|
|
Inactive Registered Visitor
Registration Date: Jun 2003
Location: Northern Ireland
|
|
Posts: 62
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 3 Posts
Karma Power: 31 Karma: 176  
|
|
Dennis, I agree with you and a visual inspection of this nature appears to be unneccessary. Have a question - have you ever rejected material from this post-irradiation inspection and if so what was the reason?
My knowledge of irradiation is somewaht limited, but from what I can remeber the individual product is not handled by the steriliser (?). if this is the case then your pre-irradiation inspection should be sufficent for release purposes.
What you can do, for piece of mind is ask the steriliser what final inspection they carry out - do they open cases for visual inspection? If not, you could ask them to do this for you.
One other thing, why does the product go into storage in the warehouse before it is inspected? maybe, if you must keep the inspection going, you could save time and effort by reducing the sample plan and doing the inspection as it comes in to the warehouse?
Just IMO...
|

11th March 2004, 01:48 PM
|
 |
Forum Moderator
Registration Date: Jun 2002
Location: Lawn Guyland
Age: 59
|
|
Posts: 3,101
Thanks Given to Others: 48
Thanked 390 Times in 272 Posts
Karma Power: 192
|
|
Denis:
You referenced the cGMP when you posted. I don't know if the folks out there realize that the FDA has a requirement for sampling and inspecting pharmaceutical labelling at the completion of all processes. Cathy's point about performing an inspection prior to wharehousing is a good one. I'm not an expert on pharma, so I think you might want to look at those FDA regs very closely before making any changes.
__________________
Al
|

12th March 2004, 08:22 AM
|
|
Courtesy Access
Registration Date: Sep 2001
Location: Southern Indiana
Age: 47
|
|
Posts: 941
Thanks Given to Others: 3
Thanked 29 Times in 25 Posts
Karma Power: 65
|
|
What does your customer and regulations require?
|
Lower Navigation Bar
|
|
|
|
Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors and 1 Unregistered Guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate Thread Content |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Settings
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|