Spreadsheet validation is an often neglected task and one that attracts the attention of all regulators, simply because they are pretty certain that they will find problems in the use, or design, or in the actual spreadsheet validation and or qualification.
The standard operating system used throughout industry for spreadsheet applications is Excel. Excel is a well used and known system with millions of programs in use word-wide. As such, it does not require to be validated. However applications that run on Excel do require to be validated. Just like any other software program the degree and scope of validation or qualification depends entirely on the risk or possibility that the application can affect product quality, efficacy or records.
Regulators expect you to be able to demonstrate that your spreadsheets are functioning correctly and consistently produce accurate data. If you cannot show with documented test evidence that this is the case, then your regulators or auditors can stop you using your spreadsheets or worse still stop your operations until the situation is resolved.
Validation Online offer a complete suite of spreadsheet validation documents, from the Validation Plan (VP) to the User Requirements Specification (URS) to the Validation Risk Assessment (VRA) and culminating in a combined Installation / Qualification / Performance Qualification (CSQ) protocol. These documents are newly and specifically designed not only to qualify your existing spreadsheets, but to ensure that all your future spreadsheet validation and qualification tasks are fully compliant.
The importance and criticality of spreadsheets to the pharmaceutical industry was recently reported on. The report indicated that the results of a survey of twenty three professionals in this multi billion pound industry revealed some extraordinary and at times worrisome problems.
The interviewees said that spreadsheets were pervasive, and many were key and product critical. Further to this, there is almost no spreadsheet software quality assurance and people who create or modify spreadsheets are almost entirely self-taught. Two each disclosed a recent instance where material spreadsheet error had led to adverse effects involving many tens of millions of pounds.
In twenty years working within the regulatory compliance side of the drug and device industries, if I was asked to single out the single most abuse process in use throughout these industries, I would have to nominate the design and use of spreadsheets. Why does something as simple as a spreadsheet figure in so many regulatory citations? Good question; and at times a difficult one to answer. When you ask a group of compliance personnel the same question you will be informed that Excel cannot be validated because it does not seal the original copy (of the spreadsheet), allows the original to be modified and has an audit trail that can be disabled. All true, but none of these problems interfere with your ability to validate that the spreadsheet is fit for purpose. They only preclude you from using the spread sheet as a compliant repository for any data that has to be stored in compliance with 21 CFR Part 11 . If the spreadsheet is signed off and dated by the user, their supervisor and QA, it becomes regulatory acceptable data stored in hard-copy, and Part 11 does not apply.
Having taken Part 11 out of the great debate; what remains. The same debaters might suggest that Excel will round up calculations, and has limitations as to its mathematical abilities. This also could be true. However it is very much up to the spreadsheet designer (and reviewer) to ensure that if number rounding is allowed; it does not meaningfully affect the accuracy of the spreadsheet calculations. Similarly the same persons must validate that the formula calculation is within the capabilities of the Excel software design.
SOP for Spreadsheet Creation. -- $125.00
Spreadsheet Validation Package. (Issue-1) -- $525.00
Spread sheets are a potential source for the classical disaster. Companies run out of funding. Erroneous quality and efficacy statistics are produced and sometimes even stock levels are totally incorrect. On one audit, where the client stated they had four critical spreadsheets to be validated, their network was searched and 212 spreadsheets were found. One spreadsheet had 62 versions, all of which were active.
You must be ready for, and expect your regulator or auditor to review the quality, structure, scope, validation and or qualification of your spreadsheets and review the following procedures and records.
For Your Security We are Now TLS 1.2 Compliant
Equipment combined IQ/OQ/PQ Protocol. $159.00
This combination protocol has been produced in response to several
hundred reader suggestions we received in our ‘Suggestions Section’. It
has been carefully designed to make it the preferred choice for Process
and Laboratory stand alone equipment and associated standard operating procedures. It is interactive, easy to use and
suitable for all mixes of equipment with and without software.
The IQ section establishes documented verification that key aspects of the equipment adhere to approved design intentions and that the recommendations of the manufacturer have been suitably considered. The OQ section establishes that there is documented verification that the installed system functions as specified and that there is sufficient documentary evidence to demonstrate this. The PQ section develops documented evidence that all the requirements specified in your corporate validation manual have been verified as operating is consistently and exactly as specified in the URS.
This Validation, Risk & Requirements Plan (VrrP) is one document designed specifically to replace three. The contents of the three original documents were completely revised and edited into a more compact and interactive format. This new format will make a significant difference to the man hours required to produce and execute these documents and associated standard operating procedures. There will also be a very noticeable reduction in the time required for the reviewing and approving tasks. This new document titled the VrrP replaces the VP, VRA & URS and now compliments our equally new 4Q Protocol, which integrates the DQ/IQ/OQ/PQ into one document.
This is an essential step forward for companies seeking to reduce validation costs whilst remaining compliant with their Corporate Validation Manual.
4Q Equipment Validation Protocol (4Q-Equip) has been designed specifically to replace four standard protocols. By taking the contents of the four protocol and carefully weaving them into one notably easy to use protocol, we have made a significant advance in the task of streamlining validation documentation and associated standard operating procedures, by reducing protocol numbers by close to 75%. The new bang up to date 4Q protocol replaces the DQ, IQ, OQ & PQ and now compliments our equally new VrrP Protocol. By integrating the old style DQ/IQ/OQ/PQ into one 4Q document there will be enormous savings in man hours in the authoring, reviewing, updating and approving tasks.
For everyone's convenience, the Corporate Validation Manual template is written in written in word.
The Standard Operating Procedure attached to this generic design qualification protocol, will chapter by chapter, take you through the task of raising a fully detailed document. The main body is split into fourteen tables, each one probing the design requirements and standards for the individual requirement. Safety and security along with user operability are very detailed. The document will lead you through all these design aspects allowing you to delete some you feel are not important to your equipment. It is an easy document to use and will ensure that you’re DQ’s and standard operating procedures, are relevant, up to date and easy to execute. Practically all the requirements are in table form. Allowing fast and clearly presented results to be obtained along with compliance with your Corporate Validation Manual requirements.
The Performance Qualification is the last of the qualifying tests that equipment and processes are subjected to, prior to the actual first product run. It maybe that there are some steps in the process that can only be verified by actually running them (quick freezing and sublimation, to mention only two) or it sometimes is the fact that the product is a very expensive product, and can not be wasted. So no one wants to run the process with product, until they are completely certain there will be minimal waste and all relevant standard operating procedures are approved.