Literature DB >> 10794775

Laboratory automation: trajectory, technology, and tactics.

R S Markin1, S A Whalen.   

Abstract

Laboratory automation is in its infancy, following a path parallel to the development of laboratory information systems in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Changes on the horizon in healthcare and clinical laboratory service that affect the delivery of laboratory results include the increasing age of the population in North America, the implementation of the Balanced Budget Act (1997), and the creation of disease management companies. Major technology drivers include outcomes optimization and phenotypically targeted drugs. Constant cost pressures in the clinical laboratory have forced diagnostic manufacturers into less than optimal profitability states. Laboratory automation can be a tool for the improvement of laboratory services and may decrease costs. The key to improvement of laboratory services is implementation of the correct automation technology. The design of this technology should be driven by required functionality. Automation design issues should be centered on the understanding of the laboratory and its relationship to healthcare delivery and the business and operational processes in the clinical laboratory. Automation design philosophy has evolved from a hardware-based approach to a software-based approach. Process control software to support repeat testing, reflex testing, and transportation management, and overall computer-integrated manufacturing approaches to laboratory automation implementation are rapidly expanding areas. It is clear that hardware and software are functionally interdependent and that the interface between the laboratory automation system and the laboratory information system is a key component. The cost-effectiveness of automation solutions suggested by vendors, however, has been difficult to evaluate because the number of automation installations are few and the precision with which operational data have been collected to determine payback is suboptimal. The trend in automation has moved from total laboratory automation to a modular approach, from a hardware-driven system to process control, from a one-of-a-kind novelty toward a standardized product, and from an in vitro diagnostics novelty to a marketing tool. Multiple vendors are present in the marketplace, many of whom are in vitro diagnostics manufacturers providing an automation solution coupled with their instruments, whereas others are focused automation companies. Automation technology continues to advance, acceptance continues to climb, and payback and cost justification methods are developing.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10794775

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem        ISSN: 0009-9147            Impact factor:   8.327


  7 in total

1.  3 dimensional cell cultures: a comparison between manually and automatically produced alginate beads.

Authors:  R Lehmann; C Gallert; T Roddelkopf; S Junginger; A Wree; K Thurow
Journal:  Cytotechnology       Date:  2015-04-05       Impact factor: 2.058

2.  Key Performance Indicators to Measure Improvement After Implementation of Total Laboratory Automation Abbott Accelerator a3600.

Authors:  Marijana Miler; Nora Nikolac Gabaj; Lora Dukic; Ana-Maria Simundic
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 4.460

Review 3.  Consolidation of Clinical Microbiology Laboratories and Introduction of Transformative Technologies.

Authors:  Zisis Kozlakidis; Alex van Belkum; Olivier Vandenberg; Géraldine Durand; Marie Hallin; Andreas Diefenbach; Vanya Gant; Patrick Murray
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 26.132

4.  Sidekick: A Low-Cost Open-Source 3D-printed liquid dispensing robot.

Authors:  Rodolfo Keesey; Robert LeSuer; Joshua Schrier
Journal:  HardwareX       Date:  2022-05-26

Review 5.  Current Nucleic Acid Extraction Methods and Their Implications to Point-of-Care Diagnostics.

Authors:  Nasir Ali; Rita de Cássia Pontello Rampazzo; Alexandre Dias Tavares Costa; Marco Aurelio Krieger
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Greater Efficiency Observed 12 Months Post-Implementation of an Automatic Tube Sorting and Registration System in a Core Laboratory.

Authors:  Fatma Ucar; Gonul Erden; Mine Yavuz Taslipinar; Gulfer Ozturk; Zeynep Ginis; Erdem Bulut; Namik Delibas
Journal:  J Med Biochem       Date:  2015-12-30       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Experience of quality management system in a clinical laboratory in Nigeria.

Authors:  Rosemary A Audu; Ugochukwu Sylvester-Ikondu; Chika K Onwuamah; Olumuyiwa B Salu; Fehintola A Ige; Emily Meshack; Maureen Aniedobe; Olufemi S Amoo; Azuka P Okwuraiwe; Florence Okhiku; Chika L Okoli; Emmanuel O Fasela; Ebenezer O Odewale; Roseline O Aleshinloye; Micheal Olatunji; Emmanuel O Idigbe
Journal:  Afr J Lab Med       Date:  2012-10-29
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.