Difference between revisions of "User:Shawndouglas/sandbox/sublevel5"
Shawndouglas (talk | contribs) |
Shawndouglas (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
A food and beverage laboratory accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 is already likely to use a LIMS within their operations. That LIMS ideally addresses numerous standard user requirements for ISO/IEC 17025-accredited food and beverage labs, including tools for the provision of preloaded and configurable sample types and analytical test methods of the food and beverage industry; the management of documents, images, and attachments, with versioning and release controls; development of regulatory-driven safety plans, including building Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) steps into laboratory workflows; and improvement of reaction time to non-conformances, including automatically messaging suppliers and re-prioritizing or pausing related activities. (For more on this, see ''[[LIMS FAQ:How can a LIMS assist food and beverage industry compliance with ISO 22000 and ISO/IEC 17025?|How can a LIMS assist food and beverage industry compliance with ISO 22000 and ISO/IEC 17025?]]''.) But what more does LAAF ask of the accredited lab, and what can a LIMS do to better address those LAAF requirements? | A food and beverage laboratory accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 is already likely to use a LIMS within their operations. That LIMS ideally addresses numerous standard user requirements for ISO/IEC 17025-accredited food and beverage labs, including tools for the provision of preloaded and configurable sample types and analytical test methods of the food and beverage industry; the management of documents, images, and attachments, with versioning and release controls; development of regulatory-driven safety plans, including building Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) steps into laboratory workflows; and improvement of reaction time to non-conformances, including automatically messaging suppliers and re-prioritizing or pausing related activities. (For more on this, see ''[[LIMS FAQ:How can a LIMS assist food and beverage industry compliance with ISO 22000 and ISO/IEC 17025?|How can a LIMS assist food and beverage industry compliance with ISO 22000 and ISO/IEC 17025?]]''.) But what more does LAAF ask of the accredited lab, and what can a LIMS do to better address those LAAF requirements? | ||
LAAF's extra requirements are largely tied to sampling, analysis, reporting, and record keeping.<ref name="FRLab21" /> A quality LIMS solution should already address most of the following requirements, but the vendor may need to make a few minor adjustments to ensure better support for the LAAF-accredited lab. | |||
===Sample acquisition and client management=== | |||
Product and/or sample registration should be able to accurately capture submitted information and product state. Assuming the product is submitted for sampling, this includes product identifier(s), lot number, shipping container, client name and street address, and observations about the status of the received product. Whether the lab samples the product or a third party does the sampling, reception should also include sampling time and date, sample size, sample identifier(s), sample quantity, sample collection procedures and preparations, and chain of custody. Some of these details may be captured as part of a client management module of the system, though most will be documented at registration. However, LAAF also requires additional sampling documentation to be captured and sent by the lab. Can the informatics solution attach qualifications documents to a client record? Can sampling plans, sample collection reports, and advance notice of sampling documentation be captured, stored, and linked to registered products or samples, scheduled analyses, or analytical reports? Can a received product and/or sample be designated as LAAF-related in the system? | |||
===Analyses=== | |||
As the LAAF rule notes, analyses can be either food-related or environmental in nature. As such, the informatics solution should be flexible enough to address the subtleties of these types of analyses and the sample matrices associated with them. The well-designed system will likely come preconfigured with multiple test types for food and environmental testing. However, the system will need to be configurable in its tests and workflow management to allow for the addition of new and customized tests and method-related workflows. This prompts a few questions. Can an existing or new test or workflow be flagged as being LAAF-specific and marked as validated for LAAF? Or is there some other means to ensure a LAAF-related sample can only be connected with a LAAF-accredited test method or workflow? Can a custom, FDA-approved method outside the scope of LAAF-accreditation be entered into the system and marked as being LAAF-useable? The system also should ensure an analyst assigned to a LAAF-specific product, sample, or test is qualified to conduct a LAAF analysis (which, by extension, means the system should be able to flag an analyst as LAAF-qualified). Finally, the entire analytical process that runs through the system should be capturing all the necessary details for what the FDA considers a "full analytical report" (see next section). | |||
===Reporting and information packet submission=== | |||
A quality informatics system will capture information and data from reception to final archiving of results. The LAAF rule highlights the importance of ISO/IEC 17025:2017 and its demands for reporting results. While the informed vendor will already address those requirements in its solution, the vendor will still want to ensure or re-verify their solution's reporting module is able to address the needs of ISO/IEC 17025:2017. For reference, the report components addressed in sections 7.8.2.1 and 7.8.3.1 of ISO/IEC 17025:2017 and required by the LAAF rule include<ref name="ISO/IEC 17025">{{cite web |url=https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html |title=ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories |publisher=International Organization for Standardization |date=November 2017 |accessdate=18 February 2022}}</ref>: | |||
* report title | |||
* name and address of the laboratory | |||
* location of activity performed (even at a mobile or third-party location) | |||
* unique identification of report components as being part of a complete report | |||
* clear identification of the end of the report | |||
* customer name and contact information | |||
* method used | |||
* unique identification, description, and condition of a sample and container | |||
* sampling date and reception date | |||
* dates of laboratory performance activities | |||
* date report is issued | |||
* reference to a sampling plan, methods, or other sources relevant to the validity and application of the results | |||
* statement of exclusive relation between the items tested, sampled, or calibrated and the actual results | |||
* results, with units of measurement | |||
* deviations from, additions to, or exclusions from the method | |||
* identification of the individual authorizing or finalizing the report | |||
* identification of results from external providers | |||
* specific test conditions (e.g., environmental conditions) | |||
* statement of conformity with requirements or specifications | |||
* measurement uncertainty presented in a same unit as or in a term relative to the measurand | |||
* opinions and interpretations of the results | |||
However, there's more that the rule requires a LAAF-accredited lab to report. These additional requirements can be met more readily with a reporting tool that allows for highly configurable reports. This would allow for elements such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection entry and line numbers, references to the analytical method used, name and signature of the analyst(s), calculations made, certificates of analysis, and the many other elements mentioned prior. (See the bullet points in the section on LAAF reporting and submissions requirements for more.) Given that LAAF-accredited labs, under certain conditions, are able to submit abridged analytical reports to the FDA, a configurable reporting module will allow the lab to select either a full or abridged analytical report based on their current FDA-approved status with LAAF. | |||
Finally, the LAAF rule currently indicates electronic reporting of the full submission package, though details on how this is to be done are sparse as of February 2022. The FDA will likely update submission rules, which the vendor should be attentive to in case a special electronic submission type is mandated. | |||
===Records management=== | |||
As mentioned prior, the LAAF rule imposes some records requirements on the laboratory, requiring document management, archiving, retention, and versioning tools to allow the lab to more readily meet those requirements. The LAAF-accredited lab will inevitably collect many documents as part of becoming accredited and enacting tests under the LAAF rule, beyond just test results. Does the system have the ability to manage multiple document formats? Is there sufficient secure storage? Can emails and other externally-generated documents be fed into and stored in the system? Given the five-year retention rule, the system should be flexible enough to handle retentions of that length, even if the documents and data are compressed and archived. It should be relatively painless to be able to retrieve all those records, in a timely fashion for regulatory purposes. Documents also need to be version-controlled should "significant amendments"<ref name="FRLab21" /> need to be made. Can the system retain all version of a document or dataset? Does the versioning procedure include the date of a change and identify the personnel responsible for the change? Can a "conspicuous" notice be added to the original document indicating a change has been made and where to view that changed document? | |||
Revision as of 21:07, 6 December 2023
This is sublevel5 of my sandbox, where I play with features and test MediaWiki code. If you wish to leave a comment for me, please see my discussion page instead. |
Sandbox begins below
Title: What do Laboratory Accreditation for Analyses of Foods (LAAF) labs require out of a LIMS?
Author for citation: Shawn E. Douglas
License for content: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
Publication date: December 2023
Introduction
Food and beverage labs and the LAAF program
The Food Safety Modernization ACT (FSMA) was signed into law in January 2011, giving the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) broader authority to regulate how the country's food supply is grown, harvested, and processed. The FSMA gives the FDA additional powers towards the prevention of food-borne risks, the inspection of food-related facilities, the enforcement of compliance controls and violations, the response to food supply threats, and the imposition of stricter controls on imported goods. The FSMA was largely born out of "high-profile outbreaks related to various foods" in the 2000s[1] and recognition that "a breakdown at any point on the farm-to-table spectrum can cause catastrophic harm to the health of consumers and great disruption and economic loss to the food industry."[2] The FSMA was amended in December 2021 to include the Laboratory Accreditation for Analyses of Foods (LAAF) rule, mandating that "testing of food in certain circumstances" be performed by LAAF-accredited laboratories[3], as part of the overarching goals of the FSMA. (However, the FDA notes that these testing scenarios represent "certain tests that are already occurring" in the food industry and aren't new.[4]) The FDA emphasizes that testing of food includes "the analysis of human or animal food, as well as testing of the food growing or manufacturing environment (i.e., 'environmental testing')."[4]
The "certain circumstances" of LAAF-mandated testing include when[4]:
- growing, harvesting, packing, or holding environments for sprouts test positive for Listeria species or L. monocytogenes as part of normal mandated environmental testing;
- egg producers of 3,000 or more laying hens, who have have already mandated tests on molting and non-molting pullets and hens, reveal Salmonella enteritidis during environmental testing;
- bottled drinking water facilities reveal Escherichia coli in their approved product and operations water sources as part of mandated environmental testing;
- the FDA issues a directed food laboratory order to any owner or consignee, specifying a particular food product or environment be tested for an identified or suspected food safety problem;
- the FDA conducts evidence-based hearings prior to a mandatory food recall order;
- the FDA reviews the corrective action plan for a registered food facility ordered to be suspended;
- the FDA examines submitted evidence as part of an administrative detention appeal process;
- a food article (that has arrived to the U.S., or has had an FDA-approved representative sample submitted prior to arrival) is submitted for admission of import or being offered for import into the U.S., to better ensure that the food article meets or exceeds the applicable requirements; and
- a food article impacted by an import alert (that has arrived to the U.S., or has had an FDA-approved representative sample submitted prior to arrival) requires successful consecutive testing in order to be removed from the import alert.
For each method of food and beverage testing that is or will be LAAF-accredited, laboratories seeking LAAF accreditation must be able to demonstrate compliance with ISO/IEC 17025:2017 and show that each method has also successfully passed a proficiency test or comparable program within the last 12 months. It must also show that it uses appropriate reference materials or quality control samples for each sample batch tested under the LAAF rule. Of course, the lab must also comply with other obligations laid out by LAAF (e.g., conflict of interest requirements, documentation of qualifications and conformance, analytical requirements, records and reporting requirements, etc., addressed in the next section).[4]
LAAF accreditation is voluntary, and labs from both the United States and outside the U.S. are able to participate in the LAAF program.[5] As of the beginning of December 2023, there are 24 accredited laboratories and seven accreditation bodies.[6] The number of accredited labs is expected to grow (though the list of "certain circumstances" is limited, in turn likely limiting the number of labs finding it worth accrediting to the LAAF program), as the LAAF program won't come into effect until well after "there is sufficient LAAF-accredited laboratory capacity for the food testing covered by the final rule."[7] That capacity number isn't known, but as more labs become LAAF-accredited, they will increasingly wish to ensure their informatics systems (e.g., laboratory information management systems [LIMS]) can not only help them continue to meet ISO/IEC 17025 requirements (which are referenced in LAAF and likely already in place for most high-level food and beverage labs) but also the additional requirements placed on the lab by the LAAF program itself.
LIMS requirements for labs accredited to LAAF
A food and beverage laboratory accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 is already likely to use a LIMS within their operations. That LIMS ideally addresses numerous standard user requirements for ISO/IEC 17025-accredited food and beverage labs, including tools for the provision of preloaded and configurable sample types and analytical test methods of the food and beverage industry; the management of documents, images, and attachments, with versioning and release controls; development of regulatory-driven safety plans, including building Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) steps into laboratory workflows; and improvement of reaction time to non-conformances, including automatically messaging suppliers and re-prioritizing or pausing related activities. (For more on this, see How can a LIMS assist food and beverage industry compliance with ISO 22000 and ISO/IEC 17025?.) But what more does LAAF ask of the accredited lab, and what can a LIMS do to better address those LAAF requirements?
LAAF's extra requirements are largely tied to sampling, analysis, reporting, and record keeping.[4] A quality LIMS solution should already address most of the following requirements, but the vendor may need to make a few minor adjustments to ensure better support for the LAAF-accredited lab.
Sample acquisition and client management
Product and/or sample registration should be able to accurately capture submitted information and product state. Assuming the product is submitted for sampling, this includes product identifier(s), lot number, shipping container, client name and street address, and observations about the status of the received product. Whether the lab samples the product or a third party does the sampling, reception should also include sampling time and date, sample size, sample identifier(s), sample quantity, sample collection procedures and preparations, and chain of custody. Some of these details may be captured as part of a client management module of the system, though most will be documented at registration. However, LAAF also requires additional sampling documentation to be captured and sent by the lab. Can the informatics solution attach qualifications documents to a client record? Can sampling plans, sample collection reports, and advance notice of sampling documentation be captured, stored, and linked to registered products or samples, scheduled analyses, or analytical reports? Can a received product and/or sample be designated as LAAF-related in the system?
Analyses
As the LAAF rule notes, analyses can be either food-related or environmental in nature. As such, the informatics solution should be flexible enough to address the subtleties of these types of analyses and the sample matrices associated with them. The well-designed system will likely come preconfigured with multiple test types for food and environmental testing. However, the system will need to be configurable in its tests and workflow management to allow for the addition of new and customized tests and method-related workflows. This prompts a few questions. Can an existing or new test or workflow be flagged as being LAAF-specific and marked as validated for LAAF? Or is there some other means to ensure a LAAF-related sample can only be connected with a LAAF-accredited test method or workflow? Can a custom, FDA-approved method outside the scope of LAAF-accreditation be entered into the system and marked as being LAAF-useable? The system also should ensure an analyst assigned to a LAAF-specific product, sample, or test is qualified to conduct a LAAF analysis (which, by extension, means the system should be able to flag an analyst as LAAF-qualified). Finally, the entire analytical process that runs through the system should be capturing all the necessary details for what the FDA considers a "full analytical report" (see next section).
Reporting and information packet submission
A quality informatics system will capture information and data from reception to final archiving of results. The LAAF rule highlights the importance of ISO/IEC 17025:2017 and its demands for reporting results. While the informed vendor will already address those requirements in its solution, the vendor will still want to ensure or re-verify their solution's reporting module is able to address the needs of ISO/IEC 17025:2017. For reference, the report components addressed in sections 7.8.2.1 and 7.8.3.1 of ISO/IEC 17025:2017 and required by the LAAF rule include[8]:
- report title
- name and address of the laboratory
- location of activity performed (even at a mobile or third-party location)
- unique identification of report components as being part of a complete report
- clear identification of the end of the report
- customer name and contact information
- method used
- unique identification, description, and condition of a sample and container
- sampling date and reception date
- dates of laboratory performance activities
- date report is issued
- reference to a sampling plan, methods, or other sources relevant to the validity and application of the results
- statement of exclusive relation between the items tested, sampled, or calibrated and the actual results
- results, with units of measurement
- deviations from, additions to, or exclusions from the method
- identification of the individual authorizing or finalizing the report
- identification of results from external providers
- specific test conditions (e.g., environmental conditions)
- statement of conformity with requirements or specifications
- measurement uncertainty presented in a same unit as or in a term relative to the measurand
- opinions and interpretations of the results
However, there's more that the rule requires a LAAF-accredited lab to report. These additional requirements can be met more readily with a reporting tool that allows for highly configurable reports. This would allow for elements such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection entry and line numbers, references to the analytical method used, name and signature of the analyst(s), calculations made, certificates of analysis, and the many other elements mentioned prior. (See the bullet points in the section on LAAF reporting and submissions requirements for more.) Given that LAAF-accredited labs, under certain conditions, are able to submit abridged analytical reports to the FDA, a configurable reporting module will allow the lab to select either a full or abridged analytical report based on their current FDA-approved status with LAAF.
Finally, the LAAF rule currently indicates electronic reporting of the full submission package, though details on how this is to be done are sparse as of February 2022. The FDA will likely update submission rules, which the vendor should be attentive to in case a special electronic submission type is mandated.
Records management
As mentioned prior, the LAAF rule imposes some records requirements on the laboratory, requiring document management, archiving, retention, and versioning tools to allow the lab to more readily meet those requirements. The LAAF-accredited lab will inevitably collect many documents as part of becoming accredited and enacting tests under the LAAF rule, beyond just test results. Does the system have the ability to manage multiple document formats? Is there sufficient secure storage? Can emails and other externally-generated documents be fed into and stored in the system? Given the five-year retention rule, the system should be flexible enough to handle retentions of that length, even if the documents and data are compressed and archived. It should be relatively painless to be able to retrieve all those records, in a timely fashion for regulatory purposes. Documents also need to be version-controlled should "significant amendments"[4] need to be made. Can the system retain all version of a document or dataset? Does the versioning procedure include the date of a change and identify the personnel responsible for the change? Can a "conspicuous" notice be added to the original document indicating a change has been made and where to view that changed document?
Conclusion
References
- ↑ U.S. Food and Drug Administration (23 December 2010). "Food Bill Aims to Improve Safety". U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Archived from the original on 26 December 2010. https://web.archive.org/web/20101226031457/https://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm237758.htm. Retrieved 06 December 2023.
- ↑ Hamburg, M.A. (January 2011). "Food Safety Modernization Act: Putting the Focus on Prevention". FoodSafety.gov. Archived from the original on 07 January 2011. https://web.archive.org/web/20110107124402/http://www.foodsafety.gov/news/fsma.html. Retrieved 06 December 2023.
- ↑ "Laboratory Accreditation for Analyses of Foods, Final Regulatory Impact Analysis". U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 3 December 2021. https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/economic-impact-analyses-fda-regulations/laboratory-accreditation-analyses-foods-final-regulatory-impact-analysis. Retrieved 06 December 2023.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Health and Human Services Department (3 December 2021). "Laboratory Accreditation for Analyses of Foods". Federal Register. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/03/2021-25716/laboratory-accreditation-for-analyses-of-foods. Retrieved 06 December 2023.
- ↑ Klemm, K. (26 April 2023). "Laboratory Requirements for the FDA LAAF Accreditation Program". ANSI Blog. https://blog.ansi.org/anab/laboratory-requirements-fda-laaf-accreditation/. Retrieved 06 December 2023.
- ↑ "Laboratory Accreditation for Analyses of Foods Program". FSMA Data Dashboard. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2023. https://datadashboard.fda.gov/ora/fd/laaf.htm. Retrieved 06 December 2023.
- ↑ "Laboratory Accreditation for Analyses of Foods (LAAF) Program & Final Rule - Frequently Asked Questions". U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 26 October 2023. https://www.fda.gov/food/food-safety-modernization-act-fsma/laboratory-accreditation-analyses-foods-laaf-program-final-rule. Retrieved 06 December 2023.
- ↑ "ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories". International Organization for Standardization. November 2017. https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html. Retrieved 18 February 2022.