Annals of Laboratory Medicine

Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine (대한진단검사의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Economic and Workflow Analysis of a Blood Bank Automated System

  • Shin, Kyung-Hwa (Department of Laboratory Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Hyung Hoi (Department of Laboratory Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine) ;
  • Chang, Chulhun L. (Department of Laboratory Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Eun Yup (Department of Laboratory Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine)
  • Published : 2013.07.01
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: This study compared the estimated costs and times required for ABO/Rh(D) typing and unexpected antibody screening using an automated system and manual methods. Methods: The total cost included direct and labor costs. Labor costs were calculated on the basis of the average operator salaries and unit values (minutes), which was the handson time required to test one sample. To estimate unit values, workflows were recorded on video, and the time required for each process was analyzed separately. Results: The unit values of ABO/Rh(D) typing using the manual method were 5.65 and 8.1 min during regular and unsocial working hours, respectively. The unit value was less than 3.5 min when several samples were tested simultaneously. The unit value for unexpected antibody screening was 2.6 min. The unit values using the automated method for ABO/Rh(D) typing, unexpected antibody screening, and both simultaneously were all 1.5 min. The total cost of ABO/Rh(D) typing of only one sample using the automated analyzer was lower than that of testing only one sample using the manual technique but higher than that of testing several samples simultaneously. The total cost of unexpected antibody screening using an automated analyzer was less than that using the manual method. Conclusions: ABO/Rh(D) typing using an automated analyzer incurs a lower unit value and cost than that using the manual technique when only one sample is tested at a time. Unexpected antibody screening using an automated analyzer always incurs a lower unit value and cost than that using the manual technique.

Keywords

References

  1. Sunheimer RL, Lifshitz MS, Threatte GA. Analysis: Clinical laboratory automation. In: McPherson RA and Pincus MR, eds. Henry's clinical diagnosis and management by laboratory methods. 22nd ed. China: WB Saunders, 2011:64-72.
  2. Malomgre W and Neumeister B. Recent and future trends in blood group typing. Anal Bioanal Chem 2009;393:1443-51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-008-2411-3
  3. Lee SH, Jeong J, Jeong US, Kim MS, Jeong YJ, Wee JH, et al. Experience with the automatic blood bank instrument AutoVue Innova. Korean J Blood Transfus 2008;19:43-8.
  4. Shin SY, Kwon KC, Koo SH, Park JW, Ko CS, Song JH, et al. Evaluation of two automated instruments for pre-transfusion testing: AutoVue Innova and Techno TwinStation. Korean J Lab Med 2008;28:214-20. https://doi.org/10.3343/kjlm.2008.28.3.214
  5. Chizhevsky V, Esagui D, Delaflor-Weiss E. Evaluation of an automated system for ABO/D typing and RBC antibody detection system in a hospital transfusion service. LabMedicine 2005;36:29-31.
  6. Sarkozi L, Simson E, Ramanathan L. The effects of total laboratory automation on the management of a clinical chemistry laboratory. Retrospective analysis of 36 years. Clin Chim Acta 2003;329:89-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-8981(03)00020-2
  7. Lee JH, Cha Y, Oh Y, Kim S, Kim HO. Cost structure analysis of blood bank tests. Korean J Blood Transfus 2010;21:105-14.
  8. Dada A, Beck D, Schmitz G. Automation and data processing in blood banking using the Ortho AutoVue Innova system. Transfus Med Hemother 2007;34:341-6. https://doi.org/10.1159/000106558
  9. Kim SH, Nam DH, Yang JH, Yoon SY, Kim YK, Lee KN, et al. Evaluation of the automatic blood bank instrument AutoVue Innova for antibody screening. Korean J Blood Transfus 2008;19:140-5.
  10. Morelati F, Revelli N, Maffei LM, Poretti M, Santoro C, Parravicini A, et al. Evaluation of a new automated instrument for pretransfusion testing. Transfusion 1998;38:959-65.
  11. Han TH, Kim MJ, Kim S, Kim HO, Lee MA, Choi JS, et al. The role of failure modes and effects analysis in showing the benefits of automation in the blood bank. Transfusion 2013;53:1077-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1537-2995.2012.03883.x

Cited by

  1. A multicenter study on the performance of a fully automated, walk‐away high‐throughput analyzer for pretransfusion testing in the US population vol.55, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.13053
  2. Evaluation of the Automated Blood Bank Systems IH-500 and VISION Max for ABO-RhD Blood Typing and Unexpected Antibody Screening vol.7, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3343/lmo.2017.7.4.170
  3. Reduction Plan of 'Undeterminable' in the Unexpected Antibody Screening by the Microcolumn Agglutination Automated Instrument vol.29, pp.1, 2013, https://doi.org/10.17945/kjbt.2018.29.1.59
  4. Performance Evaluation of Automated Immunohematology Analyzer IH-500 for Blood Bank Testing vol.35, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12288-019-01127-4
  5. Performance and reliability of a benchtop automated instrument for transfusion testing: a comparative multicenter clinical study in the US population vol.59, pp.11, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.15520
  6. Multicentre evaluation of Erytra Eflexis®, a benchtop fully automated analyser with a compact design for routine use in blood transfusion laboratory vol.29, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1111/tme.12619
  7. Benefits of VISION Max automated cross-matching in comparison with manual cross-matching: A multidimensional analysis vol.14, pp.12, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226477
  8. Managing an automated clinical laboratory: optimization challenges and opportunities vol.8, pp.1, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40070-019-00097-2
  9. Evaluation of the Automated Analyzer AutoVue Innova for Blood Group Typing: Clinical Implementation at a Tertiary Hospital over 2 Years vol.31, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.17945/kjbt.2020.31.2.131