The Elsmar Cove Wiki More Free Files The Elsmar Cove Forums Discussion Thread Index Post Attachments Listing Failure Modes Services and Solutions to Problems Elsmar cove Forums Main Page Elsmar Cove Home Page
Welcome To The Old Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums


  The Old Elsmar Cove Forums
  FDA and Medical Devices
  Must everything be signed and dated?

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Must everything be signed and dated?
Monica Lewis
Forum Contributor

Posts: 19
From:Sweden
Registered: Oct 98

posted 01 February 1999 10:53 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Monica Lewis   Click Here to Email Monica Lewis     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hello Don and Marc,

I have been working with the production people (only 3) for the last two weeks and to be honest I almost got a heart attack. Why? Because there are too many signatures and dates on the batch record, which do not make any sense. The same operator records, signs and dates each step on the batch record
(15 steps per page).In order to reduce the number of signatures, dates and make life easier for the poor operator I would like to have the following text on the end of each page or the last page: Step 1 to 15 has been performed on the same day by: _ _ _ (sign) Date: _ _ _ and step 2,3, 10 has been verified by: _ _ _ (sign) Date: _ _ _

Any comments on how to make life easy?

IP: Logged

Don Winton
Forum Contributor

Posts: 498
From:Tullahoma, TN
Registered:

posted 01 February 1999 12:52 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Don Winton   Click Here to Email Don Winton     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Ouch! Overkill, way too much overkill, even for the FDA.

First, I have made some assumptions which may or may not be correct. If not, please advise.

The QSR only requires signatures for specific sections. From your description, this might fall under ¤820.70, Production and Process Control, which does not require a signature or date at all. Since ¤820.70 does not, what about 820.80(c)? Not there either. How about ¤820.80(d). There it is: ¤820.80(d)(3) requires a signature and date as well as 820.80(d)(4). It should be noted that ¤820.184, Device History Record, does not require signatures, only dates.

Seriously, under the assumption that the activity falls under the purview of 820.80(d), then

quote:
I would like to have the following text on the end of each page or the last page:·

Not a problem.

quote:
Any comments on how to make life easy?

A lot, but try this one. It would do well to remember probability laws when considering quality records and their generation. As the opportunities for noncompliance increase, the probability a noncompliance will be generated increases exponentially. If there is a 1% chance a noncompliant record will be generated and 15 records are, then the probability a noncompliant record IS generated is 14%. Paraphrasing Marc, what is in compliance and is appropriate applies here. You decide appropriate, the QSR decides compliance.

Hope this helps.

Regards,
Don

IP: Logged

Monica Lewis
Forum Contributor

Posts: 19
From:Sweden
Registered: Oct 98

posted 02 February 1999 04:16 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Monica Lewis   Click Here to Email Monica Lewis     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Don,

This activity falls under ¤820.70. It is not easy to persuade people to do things in another way if they have been doing the same activity for many years. At the same time they tell me that they are fed-up with all the paperwork. I think that is quite oddish,
Well it feels good to have an opinion that comes from an external sourse

IP: Logged

Don Winton
Forum Contributor

Posts: 498
From:Tullahoma, TN
Registered:

posted 02 February 1999 08:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Don Winton   Click Here to Email Don Winton     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Monica,

quote:
It is not easy to persuade people to do things in another way if they have been doing the same activity for many years.

Yea, tell me about it. Changing culture is probably one of the hardest things about this field. But, properly designed, they should adapt quickly. I have found that once a better way is demonstrated, most will accept it. Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps re-education is in order.

quote:
At the same time they tell me that they are fed-up with all the paperwork

What I have found is that some (not all) think the more detailed the records, the better the compliance mechanism. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just because the FDA is a government agency, some think EVERY organization must function the same (read complicated). I saw a so-called "cGMP compliance manual" the other day that was over 1000 pages long. What a waste. If I ever do one, it would probably be less than 250.

quote:
Well it feels good to have an opinion that comes from an external sourse

Thanks. We aim to be helpful. Anything else, feel free to ask.

Regards,
Don

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


UBB 5.45c

Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!