Skip to content

MHRA · GVP · Post-Marketing · Last reviewed: 2026-02-23

MHRA Pharmacovigilance Inspection Expectations — Evidence Map

MHRA pharmacovigilance inspections are evidence-driven.

Inspectors assess whether safety obligations are operationalised, controlled, and demonstrably effective.

This map defines the evidence objects inspectors expect, common failure patterns, and what good looks like in practice.

Inspection triggers

  • Routine inspection scheduling
  • For-cause triggers based on intelligence, complaints, or emerging safety concerns
  • QPPV changes or governance gaps
  • Vendor / partner failures
  • Licence transfers, M&A, or organisational change affecting PV responsibilities

What inspectors verify

  • Timely, accurate ICSR processing and reconciliation
  • Documented signal detection, evaluation, and governance decisions
  • Risk management system upkeep and effectiveness evidence
  • Oversight of outsourced PV activities
  • PV QMS controls (deviations, CAPAs, change control)
  • Training and competence evidence
  • Data integrity across PV systems and interfaces

Evidence map

ICSR processing SOP

  • Case intake/assessment/submission records
  • Timeliness KPIs and reconciliation evidence

Signal management SOP

  • Signal tracking log
  • Evaluation reports
  • Governance decisions with documented rationale

Vendor oversight evidence

  • Technical agreements
  • Oversight KPIs
  • Issue tracking and CAPA evidence

Common failure patterns

SOPs exist but records don’t match practice

Why it happens: Procedures are written once but workflows change; teams work around systems under time pressure.

What inspectors do: Inspectors trace transactions end-to-end and compare audit trails to SOP claims; inconsistencies often drive major findings.

Outsourcing without retained oversight

Why it happens: The MAH assumes the vendor is responsible and fails to evidence ongoing monitoring and governance.

What inspectors do: Inspectors test oversight cadence, KPIs, escalation evidence, and governance decisions; findings focus on the MAH’s control, not outsourcing itself.

What good looks like

  • Clear ownership of every PV activity and evidence object
  • SOPs that mirror system reality and are followed in practice
  • Decisions recorded with rationale and traceability
  • Oversight evidenced routinely (not only before inspection)

Operationalisation

  • Maintain a controlled PV evidence library aligned to GVP obligations
  • Run monthly PV governance with recorded actions and follow-up
  • Track reconciliations and trend metrics routinely
  • Treat inspection readiness as BAU

Mapped toolkits

These toolkits operationalise the evidence expectations above. Masters remain immutable; customers edit their own copies.

Pharmacovigilance Core System Toolkit

Operationalises system-level evidence for case processing, signal governance, and oversight.

Need Regulatory Documents Today?

It takes less than 1 minute.

Back to Pharmacovigilance Regulatory Expectations