Conduct↦Quality and Risk↦Risk Review↦Re-Evaluation
What is it? Why is it important?
During risk reviews, risk control-measures are re-evaluated in order to ensure that they remain effective and whether new or additional measures are required.
Questions to ask during a risk review:
- Have new unanticipated risks been identified?
- Have old risks become less relevant?
- Do current risk control-measures remain effective or must they be replaced or improved?
- Are risk-control measures still relevant with respect to emerging knowledge and experience?
- Are delegated tasks distributed among study staff members, regarding risk control-measures, up-to-date and trained?
Risk review is an interactive process between those implementing risk control-measures, and those deciding what control-measures to implement.
Only with periodic risk reviews, and a communicative feedback loop, can it be guaranteed that quality control-measures remain appropriate and effective.
What do I need to do?
As a SP-INV or Site-INV implementing a risk strategy for your study, perform regular risk reviews:
- Collect regular staff feedback and re-evaluate the robustness of current Quality Control (QC) measures (e.g. monitoring, process verification and training)
- Decide whether risk control-measures must be adapted, improved, or even deleted
- Keep vigilance regarding deviations from predefined risk tolerance limits
- Trigger automatic risk reviews
- If a risk deviates from predefined quality tolerance limits
- When implementing new risk control-measures
- Schedule regular study staff meetings to discuss the risk management of the study and train staff accordingly
- Document the risk review in the Risk Assessment Form (RAF)
More
Example of a periodic risk review and its re-evaluation process
Protocol requirement: Lab analysis must be performed on fasting blood samples.
Risk: participants are not fasting
- 1st Control-measure: participant is informed at study inclusion regarding fasting state at blood draw
- 1st Periodic risk review: 25% of participants provide no fasting blood
- 1st Risk re-evaluation: 25% surpasses predefined tolerance limit of 10%. Control measures must be adapted
- 2nd Adaptation of control measures: Participants are reminded by SMS on the evening before blood draw regarding fasting state at blood draw
- 2nd Periodic risk review: 13% of participants provide no fasting blood
- 2nd Risk re-evaluation: 13% acceptable with given conditions. Additional risk control measures are not feasible or too costly if implemented
Where can I get help?
Your local Research Support Centre↧ can assist you with experienced staff regarding this topic
Basel, Departement Klinische Forschung (DKF), dkf.unibas.ch
Lugano, Clinical Trials Unit (CTU-EOC), ctueoc.ch
Bern, Department of Clinical Research (DCR), dcr.unibe.ch
Geneva, Clinical Research Center (CRC), crc.hug.ch
Lausanne, Clinical Research Center (CRC), chuv.ch
St. Gallen, Clinical Trials Unit (CTU), h-och.ch
Zürich, Clinical Trials Center (CTC), usz.ch
References
ICH GCP E6(R2) – see in particular guidelines
- 5.0 Quality management
- 5.0.3 Risk evaluation
- 5.0.6 Risk review
ISO 31000 (access liable to costs) – see in particular section
- Risk management: Principles and guidelines