Manual versus automated streaking system in clinical microbiology laboratory: Performance evaluation of Previ Isola for blood culture and body fluid samples

Choi, Qute; Kim, Hyun Jin; Kim, Jong Wan; Kwon, Gye Cheol; Koo, Sun Hoe

doi:10.1002/jcla.22373

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to implement A-XM using VISION Max in a clinical transfusion laboratory. Laboratory automation is now expanding its reach into hematology, urinalysis [25–27], microbiology [39,40], special immunology [41], and even into blood banks [29,30]. While there is rapid implementation of automated blood grouping in clinical laboratories, automation of XM in clinical laboratories is in a very early stage [29,30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundVISION Max (Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Raritan, NJ, USA) is a newly introduced automated blood bank system. Cross-matching (XM) is an important test confirming safety by simulating reaction between packed Red Blood Cells (RBCs) and patient blood in vitro before transfusion. We assessed the benefits of VISION Max automated XM (A-XM) in comparison with those of manual XM (M-XM) by using multidimensional analysis (cost-effectiveness and quality improvement).Materials and methodsIn a total of 327 tests (130 patients), results from A-XM and M-XM were compared. We assessed the concordance rate, risk priority number (RPN), turnaround time, hands-on time, and the costs of both methods. We further simulated their annual effects based on 37,937 XM tests in 2018.ResultsThe concordance rate between A-XM and M-XM was 97.9% (320/327, kappa = 0.83), and the seven discordant results were incompatible for transfusion in A-XM, while compatible for transfusion in M-XM. None of the results was incompatible for transfusion in A-XM, while compatible for transfusion in M-XM, meaning A-XM detect agglutination more sensitively and consequently provides a more safe result than M-XM. A-XM was estimated to have a 6.3-fold lower risk (229 vs. 1,435 RPN), shorter turnaround time (19.1 vs. 23.3 min, P < 0.0001), shorter hands-on time (1.1 vs. 5.3 min, P < 0.0001), and lower costs per single test than M-XM (1.44 vs. 2.70 USD). A-XM permitted annual savings of 46 million RPN, 15.1 months of daytime workers’ labor, and 47,042 USD compared with M-XM.ConclusionThis is the first attempt to implement A-XM using VISION Max. VISION Max A-XM appears to be a safe, practical, and reliable alternative for pre-transfusion workflow with the potential to improve quality and cost-effectiveness in the blood bank.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With a market available this can translate to a corresponding increase in profits (Ceroni, 2009). A research laboratory investing in automation can improve the efficiency of its researchers (Hawker and Schlank, 2000;Schneider, 2018) with machinery able to achieve a greater rate of experimental output than a manual based alternative (Tacker et al, 2014;Price et al, 2015;Choi et al, 2018). It should be noted that an automated protocol need not take less time from start-to-finish to result in higher output than the manual alternative, as long as it demands less human intervention (Reed et al, 2018).…”

Section: Laboratory Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Automation in the Life Science Research Laboratory

Holland

Davies

2020

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The results of this study confirm the findings published by others. In the setting of a microbiology laboratory, laboratory automation was shown to improve efficiency ( 15 – 22 ). In addition, the combination of matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF)-based microbial identification and total laboratory automation individually and together improved TATs in microbiology ( 23 , 24 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversion of a classical microbiology laboratory to a total automation laboratory enhanced by the application of lean principles

Trigueiro,

Oliveira,

Rodrigues

et al. 2024

Microbiol Spectr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laboratory automation in microbiology improves productivity and reduces sample turnaround times (TATs). However, its full potential can be unlocked through the optimization of workflows by adopting lean principles. This study aimed to explore the relative impact of laboratory automation and continuous improvement events (CIEs) on productivity and TATs. Laboratory automation took place in November 2020 and consisted of the introduction of WASPLab and VITEK MS systems. CIEs were run in May and September 2021. Before the conversion, the laboratory processed about ~492 samples on weekdays and had 10 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff for a productivity of 49 samples/FTE/day. In March 2021, after laboratory automation, the caseload went up to ~621 while the FTEs decreased to 8.5, accounting for productivity improvement to 73 samples/FTE/day. The hypothetical productivity went up to 110 samples/FTE/day following CIEs, meaning that the laboratory could at that point deal with a caseload increase to ~935 with unchanged FTEs. Laboratory conversion also led to an improvement in TATs for all sample types. For vaginal swabs and urine samples, median TATs decreased from 70.3 h [interquartile range (IQR): 63.5–93.1] and 73.7 h (IQR: 35.6–50.7) to 48.2 h (IQR: 44.8–67.7) and 40.0 h (IQR: 35.6–50.7), respectively. Automation alone was responsible for 37.2% and 75.8% of TAT reduction, respectively, while the remaining reduction of 62.8% and 24.2%, respectively, was achieved due to CIEs. The laboratory reached productivity and TAT goals predefined by the management after CIEs. In conclusion, automation substantially improved productivity and TATs, while the subsequent implementation of lean management further unlocked the potential of laboratory automation. IMPORTANCE In this study, we combined total laboratory automation with lean management to show that appropriate laboratory work organization enhanced the benefit of the automation and substantially contributed to productivity improvements. Globally, the rapid availability of accurate results in the setting of a clinical microbiology laboratory is part of patient-centered approaches to treat infections and helps the implementation of antibiotic stewardship programs backed by the World Health Organization. Locally, from the point of view of laboratory management, it is important to find ways of maximizing the benefits of the use of technology, as total laboratory automation is an expensive investment.

show abstract

Manual versus automated streaking system in clinical microbiology laboratory: Performance evaluation of Previ Isola for blood culture and body fluid samples

Abstract: We demonstrated that the Previ Isola showed high concordance with the manual method in the inoculation of various body fluids, especially in blood culture sample. The use of Previ Isola in clinical microbiology laboratories is expected to save considerable time and human resources.

Cited by 9 publications

References 20 publications

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

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

Automation in the Life Science Research Laboratory

Conversion of a classical microbiology laboratory to a total automation laboratory enhanced by the application of lean principles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About