Method Validation and Verification
Method Validation and Verification
verification
W. W. Wong
Senior Accreditation Officer
HKAS
8 September 2009
1
Method Validation and
verification
• What is it?
• When is it required?
• Why is it necessary?
• What are required?
• How much is adequate?
• How should it be done?
• Any questions on the questions?
2
Method Validation – what is it
Definition –
• validation is the confirmation by
examination and the provision of objective
evidence that the particular requirements for
a specific intended use are fulfilled (ISO/IEC
17025:2005 cl. 5.4.5.1)
• verification, where the specified
requirements are adequate for an intended
use (ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007)
3
Method Verification – what it is
4
Selection of methods
(ISO/IEC 17025:2005 cl. 5.4.2)
• Methods published in international, regional
or national standard shall preferably be used.
• Laboratory developed methods or methods
adopted by the laboratory may also be used if
they are appropriate for the intended use and
if they are validated (cl. 5.4.2).
5
Non-standard methods
(ISO/IEC 17025:2005 cl. 5.4.4)
• Verification is applicable only for standard
methods which have been validated.
• (Non-standard methods) The method
developed shall have been validated
appropriate before use (cl. 5.4.4).
6
Laboratory-developed methods
(ISO/IEC 17025:2005 cl 5.4.3)
• …shall be a planned activity and shall be
assigned to qualified personnel equipped
with adequate resources.
• Plans shall be updated as development
proceeds ….
7
Validation of methods
(ISO/IEC 17025: 2005 cl. 5.4.5)
cl. 5.4.5.2
• The laboratory shall validate
non-standard methods,
laboratory designed/developed methods,
standard methods used outside their
intended scope, and
amplifications of standard methods
to confirm that the methods are fit for the
intended use.
8
Laboratory internal validation and
verification
Laboratory
Existing information requirement
10
Validation of methods
(ISO/IEC 17025: 2005 cl. 5.4.5)
cl. 5.4.5.2
• The laboratory shall record the results
obtained, the procedure used for the validation,
and a statement as to whether the method is fit
for the intended use.
11
Method Validation – what are required
12
Method Validation – what are required
13
Method Validation – what are required
14
Method Validation – what are required
15
Method Validation – what are required
16
Method Validation – what are required
17
Method Validation – what are required
18
Method Validation – what are required
Validation of methods
(5.4 H HOKLAS Policy (c))
• Requirements differ significantly from
one technical discipline to another
• Should commensurate with intended use
• Confirm fit for intended use
19
Method Validation – what are required
Validation of methods
(5.4 H HOKLAS Policy (d))
• HOKLAS classifies test methods into 3
– standard method
– standard method with modifications
– in-house method
20
Method Validation – what are required
Validation of methods
(5.4 H HOKLAS Policy (d))
• standard method
–Conforms exactly to the standard
21
Method Validation – what are required
Validation of methods
(5.4 H HOKLAS Policy (d))
• standard method with modifications
– Differs from standard but deviations unlikely
to affect test results
– Need supporting evidence, i.e. validation
required
– Modifications stated in scope of accreditation
and test reports
22
Method Validation – what are required
Validation of methods
(5.4 H HOKLAS Policy (d))
• In-house method
– Methods other than the above two
– Validation required
– Cannot make reference to other
standard method, i.e. cannot claim
“based on” a standard method
23
Method Validation – what are required
Validation of methods
(5.4 H HOKLAS Policy (f))
• Non-standard methods shall be fully
documented and validated
24
Method Validation – what are required
Validation of methods
(5.4 H HOKLAS Policy (g))
• Shall have policy and procedure for design,
development and subsequent validation of
– in-house methods,
– laboratory designed/developed methods,
– standard methods used outside their intended scope
– amplifications and modifications of standard
methods
25
Method Validation – what are required
26
Method Validation – what are required
27
Method Validation – what are required
28
Method Validation – what are required
29
Method Validation – what are required
30
Method Validation – what are required
31
Method Validation – what are required
32
Method Validation – what are required
33
Method Validation – what are required
34
Method Validation – how much is adequate
Depends on
• the criticality of the measurement
• The scope of the method
35
Method Validation – how much is adequate
36
Method Validation – how much is adequate
0%
0%
10
%P
RO
AT
TE
%F
IN
10
0%
0%
100% 0%
%CARBOHYDRATES
J. AOAC, 83 (2), 413 (2000) 38
“The Referee”, AOAC Int’l, July 1993
Validation of methods –
Accuracy and trueness
• Definition (ISO3534-1)
bias – the difference between the expectation
of the test results and an accept reference
value
39
Validation of methods –
Accuracy and trueness
• Definition (ISO5725-1)
laboratory bias - the difference between the
expectation of test results from a particular
laboratory and an accepted reference value.
40
Validation of methods –
Accuracy and trueness
• Assessment of trueness (ISO Guide 33)
The trueness of a measurement process is
checked by comparing the average x with
the certified value, µ, of a Certified
Reference Material (CRM)
41
Validation of methods –
Accuracy and trueness
• Two factors contributing to the difference
between the certified value and the
measurement results
1. The uncertainty of the certified value;
2. The uncertainty of the results of the
measurement process
42
Validation of methods –
Accuracy and trueness
-a2-2σD ≤ x-µ ≤ a1+2 σD
a1 and a2 are adjustment values chosen in advance
by the experimenter according to economic and
technical limitation
σD 2 = σLm 2 + sw2/n
n = number of replicate determinations
σLm = between labs fluctuation ≈ σ1 (intermediate
precision) or σL supplied by CRM
43
Validation of methods –
Accuracy and trueness
44
Method Validation – how much is adequate
45
Common deficiencies
• Number of food matrices used not adequate
• Number of food types for each matrix not
adequate
• Concentration levels used not adequate
• Reporting limits estimated but not verified
• Food samples chosen not representative of the
food matrices
46
Common deficiencies
47
Common deficiencies
48
Thank you
49