In the realm of quality assurance (QA), it’s vital that standard operating procedures (SOPs) are crafted in a way that accurately and specifically reflects the control measures, tasks, and processes that the organization can directly influence and manage. Here are several reasons why it is not advisable to include processes in SOPs that you have no control over, such as country-specific regulations for Real-World Evidence (RWE) studies:
[1] Inaccuracy and Inconsistency: Country-specific regulations can vary significantly and may change over time. The organization has no control over these changes and thus cannot guarantee that their SOPs will stay up-to-date with the current regulations in each country.
[2] Potential for Non-Compliance: If the SOP includes processes dictated by external regulations that subsequently change, the company might unknowingly be in non-compliance. This could lead to regulatory consequences, including fines or other penalties.
[3] Confusion: Inclusion of country-specific regulations in the SOPs can cause confusion among the staff who are required to follow these procedures. If an SOP describes a procedure that is not applicable or is different in their specific context, this could lead to errors, misunderstandings, or non-compliance.
[4] SOP Management Complexity: SOPs should be as concise, clear, and easy to manage as possible. By including country-specific regulations, the SOPs become more complex and harder to maintain, which increases the risk of errors and decreases efficiency.
Instead of including country-specific regulations in SOPs, a better approach would be to make SOPs generic enough to accommodate various situations, while ensuring compliance with overarching international or regional regulations. Furthermore, local teams should be trained and have access to resources that detail the country-specific regulations applicable to them. They could also have local operating procedures or instructions that explain how the SOP should be implemented in light of these regulations.
Finally, there should be a process in place to ensure that the organization is constantly up-to-date with any changes in country-specific regulations and can adjust its procedures accordingly. This might involve dedicated personnel or teams, use of regulatory consultancy services, or subscription to regulatory update feeds. These processes would lie outside the SOPs, but would be critical to maintaining regulatory compliance.
Share this story...
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Registry vs Registry-Based Study
RWE 101 - Registry vs Registry-Based Study In the context of real-world evidence, a registry is a collection of data on a particular disease, medical condition, or [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Pregnancy Registries
RWE 101 - Pregnancy Registries A pregnancy registry is a type of real-world evidence collection system that collects data from pregnant women who have been exposed to [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Diversity
RWE 101 - Diversity Diversity in the context of real-world research refers to the inclusion of individuals from different backgrounds, including but not limited to race, ethnicity, gender, [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – The Patient Voice
RWE 101 - The Patient Voice The patient voice refers to the perspectives, opinions, and experiences of patients and their families or caregivers in the context of [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – ISPE GPP
RWE 101 - ISPE GPP The International Society of Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) Good Pharmacoepidemiology Practices (GPP) provides guidance for the conduct and reporting of pharmacoepidemiologic studies. The key [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – EMA Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GVPs)
RWE 101 - EMA Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GVPs) The European Medicines Agency's (EMA) Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GVPs) provide a framework for the monitoring and reporting of adverse drug [...]







