Part 11 is primarily focused on making sure that a system that uses electronic records does not have more risk than the equivalent system using paper records. Part 11 is not focused specifically on Data Integrity, though Data Integrity is part of it. As a result, you could easily have a system that is 100% compliant to Part 11 requirements but is storing electronic records that have major integrity problems.
Just like you can store a worthless item inside a very nice vault. It would be hard to list everything that should be done in addition to get to comply with Data Integrity.
In fact, I think it is of little use to think of Data integrity as a separate set of regulations for compliance. If you are truly complying with the intent and letter of the predicate rules (Parts 210, 211, and 820 for Pharma and medical Devices) then you will be highly likely to have no Data integrity issues.
I know that statement may be of little use, as a common corporate response to Data Integrity guidances is to institute a program to verify Data Integrity compliance for each computer system in the facility.
I think a better approach would be more holistic, to look at all the ways, the processes and teams (including training) with which we qualify or validate an electronic records system. And this includes design; the system is built in such a way that systems commissioned, implemented, and validated will comply with the spirit and letter of the predicate rules, and by extension, with Part 11 and Data Integrity guidances.
Add new comment