This post is sponsored by IMARC Research, Inc.
Our popular Top 10 list of FDA warning letter findings is back! To assemble the list, IMARC’s clinical monitoring team reviewed warning letters issued by investigators and sponsor-investigators last year through FDA’s Bioresearch Monitoring Inspection Program. This list of warning letter findings is not intended to point fingers at investigators, but rather, to document the non-compliance trends in an effort to raise industry awareness of improvement needed. Whether you are a sponsor, a monitor, or an investigative site, everyone has a stake in the outcome of an FDA BIMO inspection.
As in years past, many of the findings focus around protocol compliance, human subject protection, record keeping and study oversight. It’s interesting that the most common findings have not changed significantly in years past. Check out IMARC’s “Top Ten” lists for 2009 & 2010. Incorporating warning letter review into your regular staff trainings is a good way to start the hard discussions, brainstorm ideas, and better equip your staff to cultivate compliance among clinical research sites. Well-run, compliant studies result from well-trained staff. And of course, maintaining compliance ensures patients are protected and data has integrity, so when a new drug or device hits the market, we can be confident that it belongs there.
Survey on the Healthcare Financial Landscape Offers a Roadmap for Stakeholders
Zelis highlights how employers, payers, and consumers are integrating digital tools to manage healthcare costs.
This post appears through the MedCity Influencers program. Anyone can publish their perspective on business and innovation in healthcare on MedCity News through MedCity Influencers. Click here to find out how.