Literature DB >> 29280007

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

Marijana Miler1, Nora Nikolac Gabaj2, Lora Dukic3, Ana-Maria Simundic3.   

Abstract

The aim of the study was to estimate improvement of work efficiency in the laboratory after implementation of total laboratory automation (TLA) by Abbott Accelerator a3600 in the laboratory with measuring different key performance indicators (KPIs) before and after TLA implementation. The objective was also to recommend steps for defining KPIs in other laboratories. For evaluation of improvement 10 organizational and/or technical KPIs were defined for all phases of laboratory work and measured before (November 2013) and after (from 2015 to 2017) TLA implementation. Out of 10 defined KPIs, 9 were successfully measured and significantly improved. Waiting time for registration of samples in the LIS was significantly reduced from 16 (9-28) to 9 (6-16) minutes after TLA (P < 0.001). After TLA all tests were performed at core biochemistry analyzers which significantly reduced walking distance for sample management (for more than 800 m per worker) and number of tube touches (for almost 50%). Analyzers downtime and engagement time for analyzers maintenance was reduced for 50 h and 28 h per month, respectively. TLA eliminated manual dilution of samples with extreme results with sigma values increment from 3.4 to >6 after TLA. Although median turnaround time TAT for potassium and troponin was higher (for approximately 20 min), number of outliers with TAT >60 min expressed as sigma values were satisfying (>3). Implementation of the TLA improved the most of the processes in our laboratory with 9 out of 10 properly defined and measured KPIs. With proper planning and defining of KPIs, every laboratory could measure changes in daily workflow.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Key performance indicators (KPI); Productivity; Quality; Total laboratory automation (TLA)

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29280007     DOI: 10.1007/s10916-017-0878-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Syst        ISSN: 0148-5598            Impact factor:   4.460


  27 in total

1.  The effects of total laboratory automation on the management of a clinical chemistry laboratory. Retrospective analysis of 36 years.

Authors:  Laszlo Sarkozi; Elkin Simson; Lakshmi Ramanathan
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.786

2.  Performance indicators and decision making for outsourcing public health laboratory services.

Authors:  Maria Angelica Borges dos Santos; Ricardo Montes de Moraes; Sonia Regina Lambert Passos
Journal:  Rev Saude Publica       Date:  2012-04-17       Impact factor: 2.106

Review 3.  Laboratory automation: total and subtotal.

Authors:  Charles D Hawker
Journal:  Clin Lab Med       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.935

4.  Laboratory Automation and Intra-Laboratory Turnaround Time: Experience at the University Hospital Campus Bio-Medico of Rome.

Authors:  Silvia Angeletti; Marina De Cesaris; Jonathan George Hart; Michele Urbano; Massimiliano Andrea Vitali; Fulvio Fragliasso; Giordano Dicuonzo
Journal:  J Lab Autom       Date:  2015-01-21

5.  Turn Around Time (TAT) as a Benchmark of Laboratory Performance.

Authors:  Binita Goswami; Bhawna Singh; Ranjna Chawla; V K Gupta; V Mallika
Journal:  Indian J Clin Biochem       Date:  2010-09-14

6.  Evaluation of the impact of a total automation system in a large core laboratory on turnaround time.

Authors:  Amy H Lou; Manal O Elnenaei; Irene Sadek; Shauna Thompson; Bryan D Crocker; Bassam Nassar
Journal:  Clin Biochem       Date:  2016-09-04       Impact factor: 3.281

7.  Patient safety is not compromised by excluding microscopic examination of negative urine dipstick.

Authors:  Marijana Miler; Nora Nikolac
Journal:  Ann Clin Biochem       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 2.057

8.  Preanalytical and postanalytical variables: the leading causes of diagnostic error in hemostasis?

Authors:  Emmanuel J Favaloro; Giuseppe Lippi; Dorothy M Adcock
Journal:  Semin Thromb Hemost       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 4.180

9.  Preanalytical phase--a continuous challenge for laboratory professionals.

Authors:  Ana-Maria Simundic; Giuseppe Lippi
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.313

10.  How compliant are technicians with universal safety measures in medical laboratories in Croatia?--A pilot study.

Authors:  Kristina Dukic; Matea Zoric; Petra Pozaic; Jelena Starcic; Marija Culjak; Andrea Saracevic; Marijana Miler
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 2.313

View more
  3 in total

1.  IoT Based Predictive Maintenance Management of Medical Equipment.

Authors:  Abdulrahim Shamayleh; Mahmoud Awad; Jumana Farhat
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 4.460

2.  Workflow Mapping-A Q-Probes Study of Preanalytic Testing Processes: A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes Study of 35 Clinical Laboratories.

Authors:  Peter Perrotta; David A Novis; Suzanne Nelson; Barbara Blond; Anna Stankovic; Michael Talbert
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 5.534

3.  Economic Evaluation of Total Laboratory Automation in the Clinical Laboratory of a Tertiary Care Hospital.

Authors:  KyungYi Kim; Sang-Guk Lee; Tae Hyun Kim; Sang Gyu Lee
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 3.464

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.