Literature DB >> 29479855

Experimental fusion of different versions of the total laboratory automation system and improvement of laboratory turnaround time.

Hee-Jung Chung1, Yoon Kyung Song2, Sang-Hyun Hwang3, Do Hoon Lee2, Tetsuro Sugiura4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Use of total laboratory automation (TLA) system has expanded to microbiology and hemostasis and upgraded to second and third generations. We herein report the first successful upgrades and fusion of different versions of the TLA system, thus improving laboratory turnaround time (TAT).
METHODS: A 21-day schedule was planned from the time of pre-meeting to installation and clinical sample application. We analyzed the monthly TAT in each menu, distribution of the "out of range for acceptable TAT" samples, and "prolonged time out of acceptable TAT," before and after the upgrade and fusion.
RESULTS: We installed and customized hardware, middleware, and software. The one-way CliniLog 2.0 version track, 50.0-m long, was changed to a 23.2-m long one-way 2.0 version and an 18.7-m long two-way 4.0 version. The monthly TAT in the outpatient samples, before and after upgrading the TLA system, were uniformly satisfactory in the chemistry and viral marker menus. However, in the tumor marker menu, the target TAT (98.0% of samples ≤60 minutes) was not satisfied during the familiarization period. There was no significant difference in the proportion of "out of acceptable TAT" samples, before and after the TLA system upgrades (7.4‰ and 8.5‰). However, the mean "prolonged time out of acceptable TAT" in the chemistry samples was significantly shortened to 17.4 (±24.0) minutes after the fusion, from 34.5 (±43.4) minutes.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite experimental challenges, a fusion of the TLA system shortened the "prolonged time out of acceptable TAT," indicating a distribution change in overall TAT.
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  laboratory quality; out of turnaround time sample; total automation system; total laboratory automation; turnaround time

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29479855      PMCID: PMC6817108          DOI: 10.1002/jcla.22400

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal        ISSN: 0887-8013            Impact factor:   2.352


  16 in total

Review 1.  The "hospital central laboratory": automation, integration and clinical usefulness.

Authors:  Martina Zaninotto; Mario Plebani
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.694

2.  Integration of Diagnostic Microbiology in a Model of Total Laboratory Automation.

Authors:  Giorgio Da Rin; Maira Zoppelletto; Giuseppe Lippi
Journal:  Lab Med       Date:  2015-12-29

3.  Analysis of turnaround time by subdividing three phases for outpatient chemistry specimens.

Authors:  Hee-Jung Chung; Woochang Lee; Sail Chun; Hae-Il Park; Won-Ki Min
Journal:  Ann Clin Lab Sci       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.256

Review 4.  Automation in the clinical microbiology laboratory.

Authors:  Susan M Novak; Elizabeth M Marlowe
Journal:  Clin Lab Med       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 1.935

5.  Automation in the clinical microbiology laboratory.

Authors:  Carey-Ann D Burnham; W Michael Dunne; Gilbert Greub; Susan M Novak; Robin Patel
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2013-05-20       Impact factor: 8.327

Review 6.  Clinical Chemistry Laboratory Automation in the 21st Century - Amat Victoria curam (Victory loves careful preparation).

Authors:  David A Armbruster; David R Overcash; Jaime Reyes
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2014-08

7.  Experimental fusion of different versions of the total laboratory automation system and improvement of laboratory turnaround time.

Authors:  Hee-Jung Chung; Yoon Kyung Song; Sang-Hyun Hwang; Do Hoon Lee; Tetsuro Sugiura
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2018-02-25       Impact factor: 2.352

8.  The role of total laboratory automation in a consolidated laboratory network.

Authors:  R S Seaberg; R O Stallone; B E Statland
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 8.327

9.  Clinical Laboratory Automation: A Case Study.

Authors:  Claudia Archetti; Alessandro Montanelli; Dario Finazzi; Luigi Caimi; Emirena Garrafa
Journal:  J Public Health Res       Date:  2017-06-16

10.  Performance of Kiestra total laboratory automation combined with MS in clinical microbiology practice.

Authors:  Nico T Mutters; Caspar J Hodiamont; Menno D de Jong; Hendri P J Overmeijer; Mandy van den Boogaard; Caroline E Visser
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 3.464

View more
  4 in total

1.  Experimental fusion of different versions of the total laboratory automation system and improvement of laboratory turnaround time.

Authors:  Hee-Jung Chung; Yoon Kyung Song; Sang-Hyun Hwang; Do Hoon Lee; Tetsuro Sugiura
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2018-02-25       Impact factor: 2.352

2.  The Impact of Total Automaton on the Clinical Laboratory Workforce: A Case Study.

Authors:  Yaser A Al Naam; Salah Elsafi; Majed H Al Jahdali; Randa S Al Shaman; Bader H Al-Qurouni; Eidan M Al Zahrani
Journal:  J Healthc Leadersh       Date:  2022-05-09

3.  Automation of Harboe method for the measurement of plasma free hemoglobin.

Authors:  Hee-Jung Chung; Jae-Woo Chung; Joowon Yi; Mina Hur; Tae Hwan Lee; Sang-Hyun Hwang; Yoon Kyung Song; Do Hoon Lee
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 2.352

4.  Benefits of VISION Max automated cross-matching in comparison with manual cross-matching: A multidimensional analysis.

Authors:  Hee-Jung Chung; Mina Hur; Sang Gyeu Choi; Hyun-Kyung Lee; Seungho Lee; Hanah Kim; Hee-Won Moon; Yeo-Min Yun
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.