20 Feb 2013

2013 Trend: Smarter Computer Validation

by Fran Nolan


Having been around when dinosaurs roamed the earth and computer validation was “invented,” I am sorry to say that things haven’t changed that much across the industry. Validation of computer systems was originally expected by regulators and subsequently introduced in the manufacturing (cGMP) and lab systems (GLP) arenas. Clinical departments were loath to adopt validation requirements and, to this day, still seem reluctant to accept these requirements.

Over the years, the “validation community” (QA, IT, business functions, etc.) has been very well intended, with many members attempting to promote the ideas that good software development life cycle (SDLC) practices—including documented testing—made good business sense and we shouldn’t look at computer validation as simply a regulatory requirement. Unfortunately, the validation community as a whole generally failed to get this message across; and to this day, many companies, including many software development organizations within those companies, see validation as a necessary evil to be avoided or minimized at all costs.

Those companies, such as Medidata, who have adopted a more enlightened approach to validation have reaped the benefits of more effective and efficient software development practices and most importantly, higher quality software solutions. In particular, great success has been seen in incorporating validation principles within the SDLC process itself, rather than treating validation as a separate exercise. In addition, more modern development and testing practices, such as those based on the agile methodology, result in higher quality solutions, while still generating the necessary documentation expected by regulators.

In 2013, I see even more companies adopting this smarter approach to computer validation and reaping the benefits of a more effective and efficient validation practice.

More on Fran Nolan

Related posts

US Government Adopts Cloud and Agile…It’s the Medidata Way!

To meet the rapidly evolving needs of regulated companies, many ...

A Risk-Based Approach: What’s the Direction from Regulators?

Steve Young and I recently had the opportunity to represent ...

Computer System Validation a Hot Topic at DIA 2012

In March I wrote a blog post previewing the DIA ...

Reduce Site Monitoring Costs with a Risk-Based Approach

Following a joint seminar with Medidata Services Partner INC Research, ...

1

Comments in this post

  • Nick Hargaden
    1 year ago

    HI Fran

    I agree that we would all be better off if we can stop seeing validation or SQA as an “FDA thing”, or a “GAMP thing” and challenge ourselves to be the experts in our fields. In fact we should apply that idea to all our activities!

    I’d be interested to hear more on how you are incorporating validation principles within the life cycle. I would also be interested hear how you have found external parties have received agile approaches. My experience is that it still creates some concern and confusion.

    Reply

Leave a reply

1190---1190

ICON and Medidata Take ePRO to New ...

http://youtu.be/PqQFJ8wMXo8 Toda ...

Ni Hao from Shanghai! 上海的你 ...

A sellout crowd of over 130 people ...

Patient Engagement: Clinical Trial ...

http://youtu.be/sbpRP0c7SOU As w ...

Trends in Clinical Development: Stu ...

http://youtu.be/zDt66YAFWCI Stud ...

Rare Disease Patient Advocate Appla ...

As a rare disease patient advocate ...

john anstey on Ni Hao from Shanghai! 上海的你好
Great article. Exciting times ahead. I believe that China will award us the rare opportunity of applying our platform as...

Kajol on Data Management, Safety Systems and How Technology Can Improve Clinical Development Processes
It is a nice blog. It contain good information on clinical data management

Laurie Meehan on Providing Clarity on the Definitions of Source Data Verification (SDV) and Source Data Review (SDR)
Agreed - a new term would have been preferable, but we of course have the benefit of hindsight. We’re...

Steve Young on Providing Clarity on the Definitions of Source Data Verification (SDV) and Source Data Review (SDR)
Thanks Laurie for your thoughts. I agree with your concern regarding the "re-definition" of SDV by TransCelerate - particularly...

Laurie Meehan on Providing Clarity on the Definitions of Source Data Verification (SDV) and Source Data Review (SDR)
Nice job clarifying SDV and SDR: how they differ, how they complement each other, and where they might overlap. ...