System Requirement - FDA - Software Validation on various OSs

R

rstrina

#1
To all,

Who could give me advice on what the technical explanation of writing a system requirement such as

Software xyz has to run on

Windows 98 SE
Windows ME
Windows 2000
Windows XP Pro
Windows XP Home

REALLY MEANS form a Software Testing point of view? How can the Software test for these system requirements, IF THERE ARE NO SPECIFIC SOFTWARE requirments?

If anyone could point me in the right direction to get a technical explanation as to why testing Windows ME will suffice and include Windows 98 SE or if the software works on Windows XP Pro, it WORKS on Windows XP Home. Who or where can I find A RATIONALE that will uphold to an FDA inspection.

Any hints would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely, Renate Strina
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#2
Is this from a written requirement or what? You say "...IF THERE ARE NO SPECIFIC SOFTWARE requirments..." so I'm confused.
 

Al Rosen

Staff member
Super Moderator
#3
Marc said:
Is this from a written requirement or what? You say "...IF THERE ARE NO SPECIFIC SOFTWARE requirments..." so I'm confused.
Marc, I think that Renata is alluding to the regulatory requirements for software validation. If you have software that is supposed to run on all windows systems, you need to validate it on all systems or justify why the validation on all systems is not required. I think that we need to have more information before anyone can comment intelligently. Assuming that I am correct, although there is no software requirements there are system requirements (i.e. end use or user defined) that the software must be validated to.
 
Last edited:

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#4
I think you're right. What perplexed me was the 'no requirements' statement. My 'assumption' would be that the software would have to be validated on any system they advertise, or otherwise claim, it will run on.

It appears to me the person is writing software and is being required to validate it on all the listed systems. Is that how you interpret it?

rstrina - Can you give us some clarification?
 

Al Rosen

Staff member
Super Moderator
#5
Marc said:
I think you're right. What perplexed me was the 'no requirements' statement. My 'assumption' would be that the software would have to be validated on any system they advertise, or otherwise claim, it will run on.

It appears to me the person is writing software and is being required to validate it on all the listed systems. Is that how you interpret it?
Precisely!
 
R

rstrina

#6
System requirements - Software requirements, verification, validation

I want to clarify my post:

The system requirements are that the software (medical software) is supposed to run all the operating systems listed, but so far the programmers haven't written ANY software requirements for the operating systems. Of course they have written other software requirements specific to the software itself.

And my question now is, how and more specifically WHY I would have to test the software on Windows ME AND Windwos 98 SE, when the operating systems are so similar and one was built on the other?

The same with Windows XP Pro and Windows XP Home. Why test a software on both operating systems, when Windows XP Pro is the more sophisticatd OS system anyway.

What rationale do I need for the FDA to argue that it's a waste of time and resource to test the software on Windows ME and Windows 98 SE, ONE should suffice. And that goes for Windows XP Pro, test it on Win XP Pro, but no again on Windows XP Home.

If someone could explain the technical differences for me to understand the logic of testing it ON ALL OS systems or if someone could explain, why technically it wouldn't have to be done?

I'm still new to the medical field, I'm new to testing in the medical field and worst of all, I only have experience with manual testing, so it's double, three times, or more the work !

It would be great if we were to find a way to not make MORE work just because the FDA says so, I want substantial evidence so to speak!

Thanks for your input!
Regards, Renate Strina
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#7
Well, the bottom line is there are differences, however small, between the different OS versions. From the FDA's point of view testing on all OSs is important because life / health is involved. It's one thing for a game or something to crash a system (for example, I have *heard* that Windows ME is not very stable), it's another thing for software which is related to 'health' to crash a system.

Maybe one of the others can give you a better discussion on this - It's not my forte. But it doesn't surprise me that they want the software 'qualified' on all OSs it would be used on.

If it was me, I would wrote up a test procedure which addresses all the critical functions of the software and use that test on each OS. But again, this is not my forte so maybe one of the others can better help.
 

Wes Bucey

Quite Involved in Discussions
#8
rstrina said:
I want to clarify my post:

The system requirements are that the software (medical software) is supposed to run all the operating systems listed, but so far the programmers haven't written ANY software requirements for the operating systems. Of course they have written other software requirements specific to the software itself.

And my question now is, how and more specifically WHY I would have to test the software on Windows ME AND Windwos 98 SE, when the operating systems are so similar and one was built on the other?

The same with Windows XP Pro and Windows XP Home. Why test a software on both operating systems, when Windows XP Pro is the more sophisticatd OS system anyway.

What rationale do I need for the FDA to argue that it's a waste of time and resource to test the software on Windows ME and Windows 98 SE, ONE should suffice. And that goes for Windows XP Pro, test it on Win XP Pro, but no again on Windows XP Home.

If someone could explain the technical differences for me to understand the logic of testing it ON ALL OS systems or if someone could explain, why technically it wouldn't have to be done?

I'm still new to the medical field, I'm new to testing in the medical field and worst of all, I only have experience with manual testing, so it's double, three times, or more the work !

It would be great if we were to find a way to not make MORE work just because the FDA says so, I want substantial evidence so to speak!

Thanks for your input!
Regards, Renate Strina
It is interesting to come across this thread because it involves an issue many folks are unclear about - Configuration Management.

The entire point of Configuration Management is to assure all issues of compatibility between versions of a document or product are addressed and noted. It is an especially big deal for Electrical Engineers who hook their equipment into networks which all are connected and interact with each other.

In the present situation, FDA realizes that the spectrum of potential users of a software product ranges from backwater operations still using MS-DOS up to and including those using XP, Windows 2000, Unix, Linux, Mac OS-??, and so on. FDA says the burden of proving compatibility with all these systems should rest on the organization looking to introduce new software into the system rather than on the individual user to test and determine for compatibility with his individual operating system.

Consider if you had a Pacemaker which only worked on folks without diabetes (the equivalent of a software system which only works on Windows XP) - there wouldn't be much value in the marketplace for such a system, would there? In addition, there would be horrible liability problems for installations where someone missed a diagnosis of diabetes (a system running on Win 98.)
 

lindal

Involved In Discussions
#9
rstrina said:
I want to clarify my post:

And my question now is, how and more specifically WHY I would have to test the software on Windows ME AND Windwos 98 SE, when the operating systems are so similar and one was built on the other?
Windows 98SE plug and play doesn't work as well as ME, so the user will need to browse to the setup file with 98SE and usually XP Home where as ME, 2k and XP pro will actually automatically load the software.

rstrina said:
The same with Windows XP Pro and Windows XP Home. Why test a software on both operating systems, when Windows XP Pro is the more sophisticatd OS system anyway.
I don't remember the specifics, but XP Home has some pretty big quirks that XP Pro doesn't have.

rstrina said:
What rationale do I need for the FDA to argue that it's a waste of time and resource to test the software on Windows ME and Windows 98 SE, ONE should suffice. And that goes for Windows XP Pro, test it on Win XP Pro, but no again on Windows XP Home.
If you are preloading the software on a dumb box that will only run on your selected OS with your software, you are installing it at the site, and validating it at the site you might be able to argue limited testing.

rstrina said:
If someone could explain the technical differences for me to understand the logic of testing it ON ALL OS systems or if someone could explain, why technically it wouldn't have to be done?
I can't explain it technically, but when I was performing (not writing!) validations, the operating systems all acted a lot differently with the same software. I dreaded testing things on XP home and pro. If you don't want to do it, change the claims so that you aren't guaranteeing the software on systems you don't want to test it on. (How many customers use XP Home? ME had a pretty small marketshare also, and I think most companies that used 2k upgraded to XP Pro) Your marketing group should be able to give you a better idea of what OS the software will really be used on. Depending on what they say, you can limit the customer requirements and product spec, there by reducing your testing. Of course this may have already happened, in which case you're stuck smile-a1.gif


rstrina said:
It would be great if we were to find a way to not make MORE work just because the FDA says so, I want substantial evidence so to speak!
I don't think the FDA has requirements as to the OS you test it on, but that you validate the software on the OS that you claim it works on.

General Principles of Software Validation; Final Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff - 1/11/02 source FDA website said:
Off-the-shelf operating systems need not be validated as a separate program. However, system-level validation testing of the application software should address all the operating system services used, including maximum loading conditions, file operations, handling of system error conditions, and memory constraints that may be applicable to the intended use of the application program.
If the operating system requirements are based on market research, I would do the testing because you want the software to work for every user. If not, change the requirements to accurately reflect the user's needs. There will be a much larger headache if you are constantly getting complaints because your software doesn't work on every customer's system, when you told them it would.


HTH,
L
 

Al Rosen

Staff member
Super Moderator
#10
rstrina said:
I want to clarify my post:

The system requirements are that the software (medical software) is supposed to run all the operating systems listed, but so far the programmers haven't written ANY software requirements for the operating systems. Of course they have written other software requirements specific to the software itself.

And my question now is, how and more specifically WHY I would have to test the software on Windows ME AND Windwos 98 SE, when the operating systems are so similar and one was built on the other?

The same with Windows XP Pro and Windows XP Home. Why test a software on both operating systems, when Windows XP Pro is the more sophisticatd OS system anyway.

What rationale do I need for the FDA to argue that it's a waste of time and resource to test the software on Windows ME and Windows 98 SE, ONE should suffice. And that goes for Windows XP Pro, test it on Win XP Pro, but no again on Windows XP Home.

If someone could explain the technical differences for me to understand the logic of testing it ON ALL OS systems or if someone could explain, why technically it wouldn't have to be done?

I'm still new to the medical field, I'm new to testing in the medical field and worst of all, I only have experience with manual testing, so it's double, three times, or more the work !

It would be great if we were to find a way to not make MORE work just because the FDA says so, I want substantial evidence so to speak!

Thanks for your input!
Regards, Renate Strina
Renate, I agree with Marc on this subject. Although there are minor differences, it is well known that software will operate on each OS differently and might have a bug related to one OS but not an other.

On the issue of requirements, the software needs to be both verified and validated. I find that many people do not fully understand the difference and interchange the terms.

Verification is the interim testing of the software code to assure the output meets the requirements for a phase in development or of a module of code.

Validation is the process of assuring that the user requirements and intended use for the device are consistently satisfied. This is part of the Design Validation of the finished device.

Based on what you have described, it appears that you are at the stage where you can verify your software, but cannot validate it until you have a finished device.

There are many factors that affect the amount of verification and validation including the intended use and class of the software/device. I know that you may not be able to discuss the details, but it is important information for making a decision. Since you should not reveal what might be proprietary details and haven't the experience in this area, I think you should seek the advice of a consultant who has experience with Medical Device Software and FDA requirements. In the mean time download General Principles of Software Validation; Final Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff and Design Control Guidance for Medical Device Manaufacturers. Both of these FDA Guidance Documents are attached in other threads that you may want to read through.

After reviewing these, you may find some answers or have some specific questions to post here.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Requirement to manufacture under a quality management system EU Medical Device Regulations 4
T ISO 17025:2017 requirement 5.7.b. about maintenance the integrity of the management system ISO 17025 related Discussions 1
Q User Requirement Specification for HR (Human Resource Management System) Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
P GMP or quality system "requirement" comparison for different sector Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 1
Q Computerized System Periodic Review Requirement - Pharma Company Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 7
K Implementation requirement - Is it ok if we implement the system just only two weeks? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
R Customer requirement implementation - Seeking control system example or suggestions Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 1
D Measurement System Analysis (MSA) - Requirement to also do gage stability studies? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
T Device & Accessory, Components in device, or System EU Medical Device Regulations 0
M Go Live With New ERP System before Recertification Audit General Auditing Discussions 6
John C. Abnet Terms- Different Items in a system ISO 26262 - Road vehicles – Functional safety 0
T Controlling Expandable Forms in Paper-Based Document Control System Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 10
G Management Review (integrated system) Management Review Meetings and related Processes 17
M Unique Quality Management System for 2 sites ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
S Orthopedic Implants (Knee system) Sterilization Indicators Manufacturing and Related Processes 6
C Projects in the CAPA system Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 6
E Insulation diagram for ECG monitoring and diagnosis system. IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
R Quality System Functional Safety Checklist / Guidance IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 0
J Mastercontrol or other system ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 0
O Any info on release date of FDA “Computer Software Assurance for Manufacturing and Quality System Software” document? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 0
P MSA - what exactly mean "system" and master sample Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
P MSA study for visual system with artifical inteligence Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
D Big companies suffer from quality management system? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
qualprod Assign a name to a home-made ERP system? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
H IEC 60601-1 ME equipment or ME system IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 2
K Biological indicator system classification under MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 2
N Chemical Testing on Medical Devices - Solutions in a container closure system (bag) EU Medical Device Regulations 1
J Audit Checklist for Integrated Management System for ISO 9001:2015, ISO 14001 & OHSAS18001 (IMS) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
R How would you work without a quality management system? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
J ISO 13485 System 'soft start' - How to best reflect this in initial audits, management review minutes and other records? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
P Conformity assessment based on a quality management system or production quality assurance EU Medical Device Regulations 3
D EQMS - When the internet or system might not be available ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
Ron Rompen MSA on automated measurement system - Multiple Step Vision System Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
S Quality management system (Well head installation & maintenance) Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 5
DuncanGibbons Model-Based procedures and Architecting the QMS as a System Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
P How to develop executable quality management system for rookies? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
Anonymous16-2 21 CFR Part 11 - Steps to take if we want to validate an electronic system Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 2
G IMS (Integrated Management System) 9001, 14001 & 45001- Request Assistance ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
K Sterile barrier system symbols - Label redlines for a Class III device (Kit Box) EU Medical Device Regulations 0
A IATF 16949 4.3.1 - Determining the scope of the quality management system - supplemental IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
R SAT (System Accuracy Test) temperature according to AMS2750E AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 1
A Building up a global quality management system ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
A Building up a global quality management system 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
H Pedicle screw system Conformity Assessment Other Medical Device Related Standards 2
S Rees System Validation Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 1
A Document Change Notice vs complete System re-write Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
C NCR (Nonconformance System) Software Nonconformance and Corrective Action 7
K ISO 15223-1 Sterile barrier system - The 3-layer symbol EU Medical Device Regulations 1
T Ideas for developing a Supplier Quality Management System, non automotive ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
S Starting an ISO 41001:2018 Facility management system Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 3

Similar threads

Top Bottom