Hi,
I am validating now some spreadsheets and when doing the GAMP categorization, I have :
- cat 3 for simple spreadsheets not involved in data transfer
- cat 4 for spreadsheets with macros and involved in data transfer
Following the GAMP, for cat 3, we need to provide only a URS, while for cat 4, we need the whole thing (URS, FS, TDS).
But I am wondering how it is possible for cat 3 to produce only a URS and proceed for the IQ and OQ because for me :
-
FS is also necessary since that is where we will detail for instance the formula’s which need to be included in the sheet
-
TDS is also necessary since it gives a view on the designe specs (data input/output in one specific color, cells in a specific format etc.)
My question would then be to know if the way I am thinking is correct on this and therefore why are FS and TDS not foreseen for spreadsheets cat 3.
Thanks already for your answers!
In terms of GAMP categories I would use the following:
Cat 3:
Cat 4:
- Trackwise’s document management application (configuration)
- Pilgrim Software’s enterprise management suite (configuration
- LIMS
- Excel with modules
Cat 5:
- Camstar’s MES solution (configuration and programming)
- SAP (configuration and programming)
Most custom build devices used in the Medical Device industry
In my opinion Excel sheets simple of complex should fall into category 3 and 4
I would not allow just a URS to be developed for a simple URS, what does this prove?
What does this simple spreadsheet actually do?
I always perform a small system validation for all spreadsheets and do a combined URS/FS/IQ/OQ/RTM.
Simple of complex I would use the same template structure, obviously the complex spreadsheet will require more
testing.
Regards
What I call a simple spreadsheet (cat 3) would be a spreadsheet performing calculations with simple Excel functions (e.g. standard deviation, average, etc.) while I consider a more complex spreadsheet (cat4) something that will involve macro’s. So you seem to agree that FS must be done both for cat 3 and 4… what about Design specifications?
For the way the documents will be divided, I am planning on having :
- one VP for both categories
- one combined URS/FS/DS for each category
- one combined IQ/OQ for each category
- one single PQ for both category —> in this document, I will just test that all spreadsheet work all together as a system. That means that I will just test the links and data transfer between the spreadsheets (the stand-alone functionalities would have already been tested in OQ and for spreadsheets that remain stand-alone in the system, PQ will be equal to OQ)
Does this seem to make sense?
Thank you again for your answer!
Yes, I think this seems like a logical approach and a good stratedgy.
Make sure that you mention in the Validation Plan that you are using the PQ as a method to test the integration between both systems.
Best of luck!