Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical study

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: de Oliveira, Monique Gurgel
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Siani, Antonio Carlos, Quental, Cristiane Machado, Porto, Tiago Filgueiras, Rolla, Valeria Cavalcanti
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
eng
Título da fonte: Vigilância Sanitária em Debate
Texto Completo: https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1024
Resumo: Introduction: This study describes the application of the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool for risk management during clinical research to establish the treatment of patients simultaneously infected with HIV and tuberculosis. Objective: To demonstrate the importance of risk analysis associated with clinical trial protocols in safeguarding the participant and study data, and as a study’s quality standard. Method: Procedures demanded by the clinical protocol were detailed and then associated with failure modes based on the programmed visits of the participant to the study center. The failure modes were rated between 1 and 10 according to: Severity, Occurrence and Detectability, and the Risk Priority Number (RPN) was calculated by multiplying the three values. Results: In a panel of 25 procedures and 60 failure modes, 50% resulted in RPN > 120; six of which contained more than five failure modes. The highest risks were associated with the DOT strategy (RPN 294), blood collection (RPN 288), the Informed Consent Term (RPN 270) and participant data collection (RPN 240). Conclusions: The results demonstrate the importance of FMEA as a tool to assess risks in clinical studies, in line with the recommendations of international standardization organizations.
id FIOCRUZ-9_2573ee08b88280c4c8524886c84033ae
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br:article/1024
network_acronym_str FIOCRUZ-9
network_name_str Vigilância Sanitária em Debate
repository_id_str
spelling Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical studyUso da Análise dos Modos de Falha e seus Efeitos (FMEA) como ferramenta para mapear os riscos em um estudo clínicoPesquisa ClínicaGerenciamento de RiscoFMEAClinical ResearchRisk ManagementFMEAIntroduction: This study describes the application of the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool for risk management during clinical research to establish the treatment of patients simultaneously infected with HIV and tuberculosis. Objective: To demonstrate the importance of risk analysis associated with clinical trial protocols in safeguarding the participant and study data, and as a study’s quality standard. Method: Procedures demanded by the clinical protocol were detailed and then associated with failure modes based on the programmed visits of the participant to the study center. The failure modes were rated between 1 and 10 according to: Severity, Occurrence and Detectability, and the Risk Priority Number (RPN) was calculated by multiplying the three values. Results: In a panel of 25 procedures and 60 failure modes, 50% resulted in RPN > 120; six of which contained more than five failure modes. The highest risks were associated with the DOT strategy (RPN 294), blood collection (RPN 288), the Informed Consent Term (RPN 270) and participant data collection (RPN 240). Conclusions: The results demonstrate the importance of FMEA as a tool to assess risks in clinical studies, in line with the recommendations of international standardization organizations.Introdução: O presente estudo descreve a aplicação da ferramenta de gerenciamento de riscos Análise de Modo e Efeito de Falha (Failure Mode Effects Analysis – FMEA) a uma pesquisa clínica que estabelecerá um tratamento de indivíduos simultaneamente infectados por HIV e tuberculose. Objetivo: Demonstrar a importância da análise de riscos associada aos protocolos de estudos clínicos na salvaguarda do participante e dos dados do estudo, e como padrão de qualidade do estudo. Método: Os procedimentos demandados na execução do protocolo clínico e os potenciais modos de falha a eles associados foram estipulados com base na programação de visitas do participante ao centro do estudo. Os modos de falha foram valorados entre 1 e 10 de acordo com: Gravidade, Ocorrência e Detectabilidade, calculando-se o Número de Prioridade de Risco (NPR) pela multiplicação dos três valores. Resultados: Num painel de 25 procedimentos e 60 modos de falha, 50% resultaram em NPR > 120; seis deles contendo mais de cinco modos de falha. Os maiores riscos foram associados à estratégia DOT (NPR 294), à coleta de sangue (NPR 288), ao Termo de Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido (NPR 270) e a coletas de dados do participante (NPR 240). Conclusões: Os resultados demonstraram a importância da FMEA como instrumento de avaliação de riscos em estudos clínicos, alinhando-se com recomendações de órgãos normalizadores internacionais.Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde2018-05-30info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion"Peer-reviewed article""Artículo revisado por pares""Artigo avaliado pelos pares"application/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/102410.22239/2317-269X.01024Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology ; Vol. 6 No. 2 (2018): May; 7-17Vigilancia en Salud en Debate: Sociedad, Ciencia y Tecnología; Vol. 6 Núm. 2 (2018): Puede; 7-17Vigil Sanit Debate, Rio de Janeiro; v. 6 n. 2 (2018): Maio; 7-172317-269Xreponame:Vigilância Sanitária em Debateinstname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)instacron:FIOCRUZporenghttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1024/445https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1024/1023Copyright (c) 2018 Vigilância Sanitária em Debate: Sociedade, Ciência & Tecnologia (Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology) – Visa em Debatehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessde Oliveira, Monique GurgelSiani, Antonio CarlosQuental, Cristiane MachadoPorto, Tiago FilgueirasRolla, Valeria Cavalcanti2023-06-27T15:10:49Zoai:ojs.visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br:article/1024Revistahttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebatePUBhttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/oaiincqs.visaemdebate@fiocruz.br || gisele.neves@fiocruz.br2317-269X2317-269Xopendoar:2023-06-27T15:10:49Vigilância Sanitária em Debate - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical study
Uso da Análise dos Modos de Falha e seus Efeitos (FMEA) como ferramenta para mapear os riscos em um estudo clínico
title Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical study
spellingShingle Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical study
de Oliveira, Monique Gurgel
Pesquisa Clínica
Gerenciamento de Risco
FMEA
Clinical Research
Risk Management
FMEA
title_short Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical study
title_full Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical study
title_fullStr Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical study
title_full_unstemmed Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical study
title_sort Use of Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool to map the risks involved in a clinical study
author de Oliveira, Monique Gurgel
author_facet de Oliveira, Monique Gurgel
Siani, Antonio Carlos
Quental, Cristiane Machado
Porto, Tiago Filgueiras
Rolla, Valeria Cavalcanti
author_role author
author2 Siani, Antonio Carlos
Quental, Cristiane Machado
Porto, Tiago Filgueiras
Rolla, Valeria Cavalcanti
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv de Oliveira, Monique Gurgel
Siani, Antonio Carlos
Quental, Cristiane Machado
Porto, Tiago Filgueiras
Rolla, Valeria Cavalcanti
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Pesquisa Clínica
Gerenciamento de Risco
FMEA
Clinical Research
Risk Management
FMEA
topic Pesquisa Clínica
Gerenciamento de Risco
FMEA
Clinical Research
Risk Management
FMEA
description Introduction: This study describes the application of the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as a tool for risk management during clinical research to establish the treatment of patients simultaneously infected with HIV and tuberculosis. Objective: To demonstrate the importance of risk analysis associated with clinical trial protocols in safeguarding the participant and study data, and as a study’s quality standard. Method: Procedures demanded by the clinical protocol were detailed and then associated with failure modes based on the programmed visits of the participant to the study center. The failure modes were rated between 1 and 10 according to: Severity, Occurrence and Detectability, and the Risk Priority Number (RPN) was calculated by multiplying the three values. Results: In a panel of 25 procedures and 60 failure modes, 50% resulted in RPN > 120; six of which contained more than five failure modes. The highest risks were associated with the DOT strategy (RPN 294), blood collection (RPN 288), the Informed Consent Term (RPN 270) and participant data collection (RPN 240). Conclusions: The results demonstrate the importance of FMEA as a tool to assess risks in clinical studies, in line with the recommendations of international standardization organizations.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-05-30
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
"Peer-reviewed article"
"Artículo revisado por pares"
"Artigo avaliado pelos pares"
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1024
10.22239/2317-269X.01024
url https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1024
identifier_str_mv 10.22239/2317-269X.01024
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
eng
language por
eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1024/445
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1024/1023
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology ; Vol. 6 No. 2 (2018): May; 7-17
Vigilancia en Salud en Debate: Sociedad, Ciencia y Tecnología; Vol. 6 Núm. 2 (2018): Puede; 7-17
Vigil Sanit Debate, Rio de Janeiro; v. 6 n. 2 (2018): Maio; 7-17
2317-269X
reponame:Vigilância Sanitária em Debate
instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron:FIOCRUZ
instname_str Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron_str FIOCRUZ
institution FIOCRUZ
reponame_str Vigilância Sanitária em Debate
collection Vigilância Sanitária em Debate
repository.name.fl_str_mv Vigilância Sanitária em Debate - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv incqs.visaemdebate@fiocruz.br || gisele.neves@fiocruz.br
_version_ 1797042044840968192