Difference Between Monitoring and Auditing

 

 

Monitoring and auditing are two distinct processes within the context of clinical trials and research, each serving different purposes in ensuring the quality and integrity of the trial. Here are the key differences between monitoring and auditing:

 

Purpose:

 

Monitoring: The primary purpose of monitoring is to oversee and ensure that a clinical trial is conducted, recorded, and reported in accordance with the protocol, standard operating procedures (SOPs), Good Clinical Practice (GCP), and applicable regulatory requirements. Monitoring is an ongoing process throughout the trial.

Auditing: Auditing, on the other hand, is a systematic examination of trial-related activities and documents to verify whether they have been conducted, documented, and reported in accordance with the trial protocol, GCP, and relevant regulatory requirements. Auditing is typically performed at specific intervals, often after the completion of the trial.

Timing:

 

Monitoring: Monitoring is a continuous and proactive process that occurs throughout the duration of the clinical trial. It involves regular site visits by monitors to assess ongoing trial conduct, data collection, and compliance with regulatory and ethical standards.

Auditing: Auditing is a retrospective and periodic process that occurs after the trial has been completed or at specific intervals. It involves a more comprehensive review of trial conduct, data, and documentation to ensure overall compliance.

Scope:

 

Monitoring: The scope of monitoring is broader and focuses on the day-to-day activities of the trial, including participant recruitment, data collection, documentation, and adherence to the protocol. Monitors work closely with investigators and site staff to address issues in real-time.

Auditing: Auditing has a narrower and more comprehensive scope. It involves a detailed examination of trial conduct, documentation, and data management to ensure overall compliance with regulations and standards.

Responsibility:

 

Monitoring: Monitors are typically individuals (clinical research associates or CRAs) responsible for regularly visiting clinical trial sites, reviewing documents, and ensuring that the trial is being conducted in compliance with the protocol and regulatory requirements.

Auditing: Auditors are often independent individuals or teams external to the trial who conduct a thorough examination of trial conduct and documentation. They may be employed by the sponsor, regulatory authorities, or third-party organizations.

Frequency:

 

Monitoring: Regular and frequent, occurring throughout the trial's lifecycle with the aim of identifying and addressing issues promptly.

Auditing: Intermittent and less frequent, occurring at specific milestones or after trial completion.

Conclusion

Monitoring is an ongoing, proactive process that involves continuous oversight during the course of the trial, while auditing is a retrospective, periodic, and more comprehensive examination of trial activities conducted after the trial is completed or at specific intervals. Both processes contribute to the assurance of data quality, participant safety, and regulatory compliance in clinical research.


Name: Dr Ummera Banu

Qualification: Doctor of Pharmacy

Student ID: CLS_226/112023

 


Comments

Popular Posts