Can the (√n+1) Rule be accepted in Sampling Plans?
Recommendation

Thursday, 3 September 2026 9 .00 - 17.00 h
Establishment, Use and Maintenance of Analytical Reference Substances
Is a sampling plan based on the (√n+1) rule acceptable for determining the correct number of samples? The Canadian health authority (Health Canada) listed this question in the section "Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) Questions and Answers" of their website and answered it as follows:
Sampling plans and procedures must be statistically valid and based on scientifically sound sampling practices.
Among the important issues to be considered regarding the risks are:
- the previously determined classification of defects,
- the criticality of the material,
- the previous quality history of the supplier.
A sampling plan based on (√n+1) may generally be acceptable, e.g. for a large number of containers. However, such a sampling plan may pose a considerable risk of accepting defect goods when sampling a small number of containers, for example.
A documented justification is expected for all sampling plans.
Strictly speaking, these requirements only apply for der Canadian market, they can, however, be viewed as state of the art worldwide.
The question with its complete answer can be found in section "Raw Material Testing - C.02.009 & C.02.010" under Q7 - see
"Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) Questions and Answers / Is the sampling plan based on the (√n+1) acceptable for identifying the number of containers of raw material to be sampled?"
Related GMP News
06.07.2026Revised Annex 19 on Reference and Retention Samples
01.07.2026Several FDA Warning Letters and Untitled Letters on Asbestos Testing of Talc in OTC Drug Products
24.06.2026Analytical Quality Group Developments January through April 2026
17.06.2026BioPhorum Publishes a Roadmap for QC Sample Test Execution
03.06.2026EMA Provides an Outlook on the Product-Specific Bioequivalence Guidelines Expected in 2026
03.06.2026FDA Warning Letter: Missing Method Validation - From a QC Topic to a Market-Access Problem


