Common Sense Change Control in Regulated Life Science Environments

There is no doubt that life science companies arelife science companies are surely "losing out" on
highly regulated. Between the FDA, ISO, EMEAchanges that should occur. This aspect of an
(Europe), CLIA and additional regulatory organizations,employee's duties are so important in fact that
life science companies are struggling to keepemployees should not even be hired without
everybody happy. Though motivated by gooddetermining whether or not they can provide clear
intentions however, life science companies' efforts towritten and/or verbal communication in a change
meet every regulation are actually counterproductive,control context. To determine this ability, employees
since---like the unwise high school student---they arecould be tested quickly by asking them to write a
striving to "pass the test" without "learning thechange control request justification after they had
material."been given a hypothetical "big picture" scenario and
Getting Back in Controlasked to relate their justifications to the immediate
Life science companies need to realize thateffects that the change would have on the overall
regulations are designed not to push companies intopurposes specified in the scenario.
an oblivion of confusion but are actually designed (or"Document the Change"
at least should be) with the intent of gettingDocumenting change control requests and
companies to think about the "big picture" or thejustifications is fairly straight forward. The FDA
purposes of their own company projects.regulations and/or directives specify a good amount
Take change control processes for example. Changeof the information that should be contained on
control processes can get tricky. When a companychange control requests and/or additional change
has a thousand or more annual requests for changecontrol related information.
and has to make sure that once approved these theControlling the ebb and flow of change control forms
requests are put into action and effectively resolvedand documentation however can be a bit complex. In
closed, while simultaneously maintaining, tracking andfact, managing any type of compliance
archiving all related documentation, it's no wonderdocumentation is often the monster of compliance in
that change control processes the world over stillgeneral. However, current technology has resolved
give the FDA enough reason to hand out changemany of the issues involved with both company wide
control related 483s like candy on the 31st ofchange control process management and
October.documentation change control. Life science QA
Taken at a simplified level however, change control ismembers and other professionals for example should
actually beautifully simple.search for a software solution/system that allows life
Change Control Simplifiedscience companies to automate tasks and processes
The FDA for instance outlines the simplicity of theassociated with change control, company wide
control of change in an article entitled, Changedocumentation (including change control related
Control: Best Practices For FDA-Compliant Medicaldocumentation) and compliance.
Device Manufacturers, when it states that "At its"Get all Necessary and Appropriate Approvals"
most basic, change control is really just commonThose groups assigned to approve change control
sense. There are six steps to this very importantrequests should 1) be large enough to stimulate
process:o Identify the needed change;o Justify thevarious opinions and 2) should include at least one or
change;o Document the change;o Get all necessarytwo individuals with significant change control
and appropriate approvals;o Communicate the changeexperience. Approval groups should also have a deep
and train all the people who are affected; andounderstanding of the "big picture" as should most
Implement and evaluate it afterward"employees but in addition should also have an even
Yeah Right!deeper sense of change applicability and change
Yeah. Easy for the FDA to say right? They are notprioritization. The question of applicability is often
the ones who have to implement the change controlresolved via open conversation with other approval
system. However, isn't there comfort in the fact thatmembers and prioritization levels and changes should
the FDA has only provided a brief and very generalbe documented well on SOPs and should always be
outline for change control processes and that it is theadhered to by approval members. Prioritization of
life science companies themselves that get to fill in allchange control request processes may and should go
of the blanks? Some companies might wish the FDAthrough a variety of changes as company priorities
would be more specific but then how would thechange.
learning occur?"Communicate the Change and Train All the People
This article should help companies fill in the changewho are Affected"
control blanks by providing outlines for success in theCommunication of a change can occur quickly via a
FDA template:software solution(s) such as the system mentioned
"Identify the Needed Change"above. Training processes as well can be managed
First and foremost, employees need a greaterelectronically. However, the most important aspect of
understanding of the company projects to whichtraining is to constantly emphasize the "big picture"or
they are assigned. When they are assigned to amain purposes of a project.
specific department for instance, they need toImplement and Evaluate it Afterward
understand the overall "big picture" of theThe implementation and evaluation of changes should
department's goals and most likely the company'sbe carefully and conscientiously monitored. To save
goals as well. Department managers must ensuretime and to eventually save revenue, life science
that initial and continuing change control trainingcompanies should invest in a system that will not only
includes project focused information that will not onlymanage change control and document control
improve change control results but will giveprocesses but that will track and maintain all of the
employees the sense that they are trusted enoughdata associated with the changes themselves. The
to participate.system should also have reporting capabilities so that
"Justify the Change"data can be viewed and analyzed scientifically.
Justifying the change is often left to the employeeConclusion
or employees that identified the potential need for aTo effectively control a change control process, life
change in the first place. Justification of a change isscience companies need to focus on the purpose or
an extremely important aspect of controlling changethe big picture of life science projects and also need
processes. If the initiator of the change cannotto search for solutions that will automate many of
elucidate why he or she believes the change shouldthe processes associated with change control.
occur in the overall context of the big picture then