Quality Digest      
  HomeSearchSubscribeGuestbookAdvertise March 23, 2019
This Month
Home
Articles
Columnists
Departments
Software
Need Help?
Resources
ISO 9000 Database
Web Links
Web Links
Back Issues
Contact Us
Columnist H. James Harrington

Photo: Scott Paton, publisher

  
   

The Medical Industry’s Move Toward Quality, Part Two

Introducing risk management methods into the medical device industry

 

 

In my February column, I discussed the Food and Drug Administration’s plans to introduce a risk-based approach to its projected 21st century update of the current Pharmaceutical Good Manufacturing Practice. To better understand what this approach might entail, one must look at what’s currently taking place in the medical device industry, which is already moving toward a risk-based approach.

Risk management is hardly new. It’s academically defined as “the techniques used to minimize and prevent accidental loss to a business.” This definition first appeared between 1960 and 1965.

The aerospace and defense industries have been using risk analysis and evaluation techniques for decades as an integral part of the design process. Methodologies such as failure mode and effects analysis, failure mode effect and criticality analysis, fault tree analysis and reliability-centered maintenance are well-established design and process review tools in these industries.

Moreover, risk-based initiatives are not new to the FDA. Categorizing medical devices into Classes I, II and III--based on ascending levels of potential harm to the patient and with increasingly stringent standards for each class--is a risk-based approach. Hazard analysis and critical control points applied to the food proc-essing industry represent an example of the FDA imposing a risk-assessment requirement on a specific industry sector.

New in the medical device industry is the recent publication of ISO 13485:2003, Medical Devices--Quality management systems, requirements for regulatory purposes. This standard incorporates several significant and interrelated changes to the 1996 version as well as to ISO 9001:2000, the standard upon which ISO 13485:2003 is based. The new version includes:

The addition of the phrase “for regulatory purposes”

A stated objective of promoting “harmonized medical device regulatory requirements”

A requirement for a “process approach to quality management”

The inclusion of many documentation and record requirements dropped by ISO 9001:2000

The addition of documented requirements for risk management

Canada and the European Union recognize ISO 13485:2003, whereas the FDA, for now, is sticking with its Quality System Regulation. Therefore, manufacturers in the United States will need quality management systems that cover both (not two separate management systems, as some have suggested). The deadline to transition from ISO 13485:1996 to the 2003 version is July 15, 2006. However, organizations doing business in Canada must transition by March 15, 2006. The most significant difference between the two versions is the risk management requirement.

To begin, the standard requires documented risk management throughout the product realization cycle, which includes product planning, determining customer requirements, design and development, production and service, and control of monitoring and measuring devices. Some key processes included are design verification and validation, verification of purchased product, and validation of production and service products. If there’s any doubt as to ISO 13485:2003’s intent, the standard refers users to ISO 14971:2000, Medical devices--Application of risk management to medical devices.

According to ISO 14971:2000, “risk” in medical devices lingo is a “combination of the probability of the occurrence of harm and the severity of that harm.” The higher the probability of occurrence and/or the greater the severity of potential harm, the lower the acceptability of risk. The accompanying figure, adopted from ISO 14971:2000, Annex E, illustrates the concept. (Note: the acronym ALARP means “as low as reasonably practicable.”)

Risk management--or the “systematic application of management policies, procedures and practices to the tasks of analyzing, evaluating and controlling risk”--comprises four stages:

1. Risk analysis

2. Risk evaluation

3. Risk control

4. Postproduction information

The first two--analysis and evaluation--compose risk assessment, which is an essential component of product planning. ISO 14971:2000 further breaks down the four stages into 13 detailed steps, each of which must be documented and recorded to verify compliance.

Clearly, a risk-based approach is the logical extension of a process approach to quality management systems. In auditing management systems, both internally and externally, organizations must concentrate on processes most essential to the final product’s quality and safety. If the final product is a medical or pharmaceutical device, its potential to cause harm is a significant characteristic that must be assessed and monitored.

In practical terms, a risk- or process-based approach means that medical device and pharmaceutical developers, manufacturers, certification bodies and regulatory agencies must have auditors and inspectors who can:

Understand process auditing and are capable of reviewing and understanding risk analysis methodologies

Evaluate the adequacy of an organization’s risk management files

Process validation reports and other critical data

Verify that an organization is in compliance with ISO standards and federal regulations

We must truly move from cursory audits of all processes to in-depth audits of critical processes. It’s a big job.

About the author

Stanley A. Marash, Ph.D., is chairman and CEO of The SAM Group, which includes STAT-A-MATRIX Inc. and Oriel Inc. Marash is the author of Fusion Management (QSU Publishing Co., 2003). Note: Fusion Management is a trademark of STAT-A-MATRIX Inc. ©2004 STAT-A-MATRIX Inc. All rights reserved.