At PCS we perform a lot of GMP audits. Obviously, the BPR (batch processing record) is at the top of the list of documents we would normally like to inspect. What we observe in many cases might not surprise you. Batch records which exceed FIVE-HUNDRED pages are no stranger to us, in comparison, the code that navigated Apollo 11 to the moon and back was just 1,132 pages long.If size prohibits you from being compliant, you might want to rethink your batch record, especially if the record is needed at multiple locations at the same time. The possibility for a paragraph to be left incomplete can be seen as a minor error, but operator error due to impractical batch records is unacceptable. After all, the batch record is the direct source for an operator to see what has to be done.
But it’s not just sheer size which complicates matters. Processes change over time, if the batch records are not updated accordingly, operators will find ways of making the batch record work. One way or another.
We have yet to meet an operator who loves to do a bad job at filling in batch records, we’ve seen plenty of bad batch records though, forcing the operators to do a bad job.
We observe comment sections containing data which should be recorded in distinct columns. If a comment section is missing, operators will simply use empty rows to record the data. The result? Frustrated batch reviewers and unhappy operators. We have yet to meet an operator who loves to do a bad job at filling in batch records, we’ve seen plenty of bad batch records though, forcing the operators to do a bad job.
So how to prevent all these common mistakes? We’ll start off with a simple approach, the EudraLex. Chapter 4.20 of Eudralax Volume IV (GMP Guidelines) provides some essential guidance for the Batch Processing Record:The BPR should be based on the relevant parts of the currently approved Manufacturing Formula and Processing Instructions. The guidance even includes a list of items which should be included:
So what does this list teach us? It states that significant intermediate stages should be recorded. When we observe the five-hundred-page batch records, we raise the question: Are all the steps in the batch record significant?Obviously, these huge batch records are just an example. We would, however, like to invite you to have a look at your company’s batch records, is all information being requested because it is significant or because of fear of leaving out something which might be significant?
The latter could point to a lack of process understanding, which we’ll talk about in our next blog!
Reduce Human Errors in the Pharmaceutical Industry
Foolproof Batch Records – the Process Approach
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hit enter to search or ESC to close
Receive our free course brochure in your inbox, including all course updates! Download the course brochure and discover:
Please wait while you are redirected to the right page...