CAPA Training and Causes of Warning Letters due to Lack of Comprehension
A timely, well documented, Corrective / Preventive Action program validates a quality system that is not only capable of identifying potential problems but also effectively correcting problems when incidents do occur and as part of the Continuous Quality Improvement program, correcting potential problems prior to occurrence. Adequate incident tracking is the primary foundational element for an effective CAPA system.
“Proper” completion of the required forms in the “proper” order as described in the corporate directives and site procedures is what is required to remediate and prevent future observations by auditors and inspectors who have found numerous implementation issues and execution as result of variances in overall comprehension (failure to establish and maintain an adequate CAPA program). Examples are presented during the presentation
Why should you attend?
A vast majority of the current industry deficiencies which have led to isolated 483s, Warning Letters and Consent Decrees are the result of deficient technical documentation and effective means of assessing various elements of CAPA expectations for products produced and distributed under the FDA regulations.
How do you know that your CAPA system procedure(s) that address the requirements of the quality system regulation have been technically defined, documented and implemented to determine if appropriate sources of product and quality problems are being identified and that the data from these sources are being analyzed and documented in an easy to understand technical report to identify existing product and quality problems that may require corrective action and/or preventative action?
Areas Covered in the Session:
Too often regulatory documents are written using subjective terminology and grammar (first person, pronouns and adverbs) instead of objective, technical descriptions of the element being addressed (stick to the facts). Lack of technical writing skills has contributed to the majority of the current submission rejections, 483s, warning letters and consent decrees - see FDA examples at end of presentation. GMP controlled documents must be written in a way that will be clear to the jury when presented in a court case, as opposed to writing like “we are having a conversation”. Who in this case is “we”, the head of quality or a janitor?
How to determine if sources of product and quality information that may show unfavorable trends have been identified as well as confirming that data from tracking system, complaint handling or other sources are organized to identify potential product and quality problems that may require preventive action that would be easily understood by a third party reviewer (FDA inspector).
Implementing an effective corrective actions or preventive action capable of meeting QS Regulations and satisfying quality assurance and GMP/GDP documentation requirements is accomplished in nine basic steps. The order of the listed activities is critical and all too often not followed in the specified sequence which has a negative effect when CAPA systems are inspected. Need to understand the difference between correction and corrective action.
Who will benefit :
Inspectors, Auditors, Quality and Documentation Personnel within the industry as well as Regulatory, Quality, Operations and Development