Workflow and Maintenance Characteristics of Five Automated Laboratory Instruments for the Diagnosis of Sexually Transmitted Infections

Author:

Ratnam Sam12,Jang Dan3,Gilchrist Jodi3,Smieja Marek3,Poirier Andre4,Hatchette Todd5,Flandin Jean-Frederic6,Chernesky Max3

Affiliation:

1. Division of Community Health and Humanities, Memorial University, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

2. Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

3. St. Joseph's Healthcare/McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

4. Centre de santé et de services sociaux de Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, Quebec, Canada

5. Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

6. Public Health Laboratory, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

Abstract

ABSTRACT The choice of a suitable automated system for a diagnostic laboratory depends on various factors. Comparative workflow studies provide quantifiable and objective metrics to determine hands-on time during specimen handling and processing, reagent preparation, return visits and maintenance, and test turnaround time and throughput. Using objective time study techniques, workflow characteristics for processing 96 and 192 tests were determined on m2000 RealTi m e (Abbott Molecular), Viper XTR (Becton Dickinson), cobas 4800 (Roche Molecular Diagnostics), Tigris (Hologic Gen-Probe), and Panther (Hologic Gen-Probe) platforms using second-generation assays for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae . A combination of operational and maintenance steps requiring manual labor showed that Panther had the shortest overall hands-on times and Viper XTR the longest. Both Panther and Tigris showed greater efficiency whether 96 or 192 tests were processed. Viper XTR and Panther had the shortest times to results and m2000 RealTi m e the longest. Sample preparation and loading time was the shortest for Panther and longest for cobas 4800. Mandatory return visits were required only for m2000 RealTi m e and cobas 4800 when 96 tests were processed, and both required substantially more hands-on time than the other systems due to increased numbers of return visits when 192 tests were processed. These results show that there are substantial differences in the amount of labor required to operate each system. Assay performance, instrumentation, testing capacity, workflow, maintenance, and reagent costs should be considered in choosing a system.

Publisher

American Society for Microbiology

Subject

Microbiology (medical)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3