How to Quantify Significant Change for a Shelf Life Stability Test

C

coolbreeze

#1
Hello everyone , this is my first post to a forum that I have utilized as a resource for many years. I am glad that I found this site when I did and appreciate all of the people that make this site what it is. Enough of the praise and onto the questions.

I am working on a Shelf Life Stability study for a new pouch that is is used to package terminally sterilized medical devices. I am wondering how to quantify a significant change in material and seal properties? The vendor supplying the pouches has stated that the change in material or seal properties would have to be higher than 25% to be considered significant. Their acceptance criteria statement reads "Historical data and industry references would suggest that a change of more than approximately 25% is a guideline for the determination of a relevant change in the properties of the material."

Does anybody know where I could find these industry references?
Also, how is your company quantifying this significant change?

I have never seen anything like this in any standard or other reference material that I have read and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Coolbreeze
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Ronen E

Problem Solver
Staff member
Moderator
#3
Hello and welcome to posting on the Cove!

A clarification question: Are you relating to an intended change by the pouch manufacturer, or to a deterioration in the pouch over time (=lack of stability)? I'm asking because to me it sounds more like a policy which the manufacturer chose to follow when introducing changes (=to make decisions whether or not they have to notify their clients), and they've done their little research so they can justify it when asked "how did you form this policy?".

Either way, 25% sounds a bit dodgy to me. My gut feeling says anything beyond 10%, or even 5%, is notifiable.

Cheers,
Ronen.
 
#4
It might be worth comparing your process and changes with those that have been conducted by Dupont, the manufacturers of Tyvek. (trademark plus disclosure - I have no connection).

Last year Dupont announced they were changing the manufacturing method for some of their Tyvek products. They instituted a programme of tests and consultation with many regulatory bodies in what they called the Transition Project. Details here:-

http://www2.dupont.com/Medical_Packaging/en_US/news_events/medical_packaging_transition_landing.html

Our EU notified body sent a position statement that suggested that device manufacturers of class I, IIa, and IIb could handle the change (of Tyvek) within their own QC systems whilst class III manufacturers would be expected to inform their notified body of a significant change.
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#5
in medical industry (as well as most others such as aerospace) the 'significance' of the change is based on it's potential effect to the end use product and not on the amount of change to the material, component or sub-assembly.

Most suppliers try this type thing to 'get out of' validation testing - this response is not based on truth, physics, generally accepted practices or any regulatory standard or guideline. Your supplier may as well have said that Bigfoot told him what to do.
 
C

coolbreeze

#6
Thanks for the responses. For clarification, I am performing a shelf life stability test to prove that our seals and the manufacturer's pouch seals remain stable for 5 years.

I came across this statement when reviewing the manufacturer's data, so I am not really sure what the intentions of the statement was. Therefore, it may have been to justify notification to customers or anything for that matter. I also thought that 25% seemed a bit large, although when performing some of our previous aging tests we have seen periodic changes in seal strength that were this large.

Historically, my company has an subjective and open ended statement for significant change which does not provide a definition of what constitutes a "significant change". I was hoping to get some guidance for an objective acceptance criteria or a defensible definition for "significant change" that can be used to measure and quantify the amount of change that occurs during testing. If there happens to be some reference document or standard that states this, all the better.

Thanks again.
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#7
Typically a substantive change is one that is diagnostically significant or would negatively affect your label claims or other published claims. The size of this change is therefore situationally dependent.
 

Ronen E

Problem Solver
Staff member
Moderator
#8
Thanks for the responses. For clarification, I am performing a shelf life stability test to prove that our seals and the manufacturer's pouch seals remain stable for 5 years.

I came across this statement when reviewing the manufacturer's data, so I am not really sure what the intentions of the statement was. Therefore, it may have been to justify notification to customers or anything for that matter. I also thought that 25% seemed a bit large, although when performing some of our previous aging tests we have seen periodic changes in seal strength that were this large.

Historically, my company has an subjective and open ended statement for significant change which does not provide a definition of what constitutes a "significant change". I was hoping to get some guidance for an objective acceptance criteria or a defensible definition for "significant change" that can be used to measure and quantify the amount of change that occurs during testing. If there happens to be some reference document or standard that states this, all the better.

Thanks again.
Hello again and thanks for clarifying.

In the context of sterile pouches seal stability - IMO the "significant change" clause is irrelevant. Even seal strength is not too relevant, though it's quite easy to measure and process, and thus tempting :) Of course seal strength has to be above an acceptable minimum, but much more important is the seal barrier (sealing) quality. The best way to demonstrate that is via biological challenge (sterility testing) but since it's a bit expensive and complicated, many start off with mechanical tests such as pressure testing (inflating and looking for pressure drops) and dye testing - each has their pros and cons. I am not aware of 1 comprehensive published standard covering this subject in a very good way - what I've seen is a combination of scattered published test methods, in-house developed test methods, and some (creative?) justifications. You could, though, make some good use of ISO 11607 (probably already are).

Cheers,
Ronen.
 

Scott Catron

True Artisan
Super Moderator
#9
Is there a way to statistically test the change in material or seal properties? I had to do something similar to validate a process change to answer the question: Does the change in process statistically make the product different? I don't have time to look it up right now, but there is a way to compare two distributions and see if they are different, within a previously-chosen confidence level.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S How to quantify the Benefits of Internal and External OHS audits? Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 4
D Visual Inspection - How do you quantify Visual Inspection for TS16949 Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
J Quantify Quality Objectives? Auditing company's documented interpretation ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
R PAPP Metrics - Can we quantify PPAP's? APQP and PPAP 7
U Power supply - Change From 160 to 300 Watts - Significant change? EU Medical Device Regulations 2
J Significant change related to design and intended use EU Medical Device Regulations 3
L Significant Production Run - How 300 was determined to be the minimum quantity APQP and PPAP 2
K Is a change that fixes a recalled device significant? Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 2
L Significant change notice for outsourced warehouse Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 2
qualprod The Perfect audit? External Audit causes a significant negative impact in a company General Auditing Discussions 9
Ed Panek Is Shelf Life Change a significant change? CE Marking CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 7
K Interpretation of significant change - material change Canada Medical Device Regulations 3
R How long to wait for Notified Body Response - Potentially significant change to a medical device CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 6
shimonv Non-significant notice of change to notified body EU Medical Device Regulations 4
C Suppliers re-classification from Critical to Significant or from Significant to Non-critical Supply Chain Security Management Systems 0
C Significant Organizational Changes - Documented Responsibilities Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
C EPA NPDES VISUAL ASSESSMENT - No Significant Storm Event ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 0
M Notifying Registrar of Significant QMS changes ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
J Applying for 510K - What is a significant process change and what is not US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
V Screening DOE with 7 Input factors and 4 responses - Significant factors Using Minitab Software 1
shimonv FDA released final guidance documents on what constitutes a significant change Other US Medical Device Regulations 2
R AS9100D Cl. 8.4.2 - Identify Raw Material as a Significant Operational Risk AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
G Sample Size, Significant Figures, Scale General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
I Catch up 510(k) - Non-significant changes were made Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
M DOE: Significant factor or not Using Minitab Software 2
K Plastic Resin designated as Significant Characteristic Manufacturing and Related Processes 7
G Supplier Significant Environmental Aspects - Audit Finding ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 21
A Significant Figures and Rounding SOP Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
E FDA Significant Change Interpretation - Guidance Document EU Medical Device Regulations 2
somashekar Industry examples of Significant Beneficial Environmental Impacts Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 3
Q Reporting Significant Medical Device Changes to Argentina's ANMAT Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 3
S Format for Significant Environmental Aspects Study ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
M Auto Parts Warehousing Facility ISO 14001 Significant Aspects ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 23
R 4 Factors 3 Level DOE to determine which factors are significant Using Minitab Software 2
5 Number of 'significant digits' in measurements Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 31
R ISO is certified to ISO 14001:2004 - What are their Significant Environmental Aspects ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 2
S Managing a Significant Number of Outstanding Non-Conformities Nonconformance and Corrective Action 6
E Significant Change and Guidance Documents for Medical Devices Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 6
E What's the difference: AIAG-PPAP's "Significant Production Run" and "Run @ Rate"? APQP and PPAP 11
T Health Canada Class III/IV "Significant Change" guidance interpretation Canada Medical Device Regulations 2
D Best Minitab Tool to determine a Statistically Significant Trend Using Minitab Software 5
C Significant changes between EN80079-34 and EN 13980:2002 which it replaces Manufacturing and Related Processes 7
K I've had a significant win with Safety Policy Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 12
B Example of Production Process Change having Significant Consequences AS9100C 7.5.1.2 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
J Ford changing their acronym for Significant Characteristics from HIC to CTQ Customer and Company Specific Requirements 2
M Significant FDA Medical Device Marketing Shift... 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 10
R Definition Significant Event definition - 8.2.3.1 - Monitoring & Measurement of MFG Processes Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 4
C Does a "Significant Change" apply to Class II Medical Devices? Canada Medical Device Regulations 8
O Significant Production Run - 2.1 in Section 2 of the PPAP Manual fourth edition APQP and PPAP 3
B Rounding Numerical Values Up or Down with respect to the number of Significant Digits Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 9

Similar threads

Top Bottom