Skip to main content

Efficient Laboratory Workflow Management

BayBiotech.NET

In current times demands on laboratory performance are becoming more intensive as the number of new tests and diseases are adding on to our list as well as a greater demand for accuracy in test results is increasing by a much more controlled regulatory environment.
In order to meet these demands, laboratory personnel are working on an ongoing basis to improve efficiency and productivity through better control over the operation and function of all aspects of the testing process by incorporating automation and use of computerized system wherever possible.

Creation of an efficient Workflow
helps make the entire process cost effective and efficient and a framework for creating a workflow may include:
1. Understanding the issues relating to creating a work list
2. Describe ways to minimize laboratory contamination
3. Understand ways to improve labor efficiency
4. Understand key variables that contribute to testing accuracy
 Explain the importance of sensitivity and specificity
 Describe the relationship between prevalence and predictive value

The core of a good laboratory set-up must focus on providing the practitioner with accurate test results that can be achieved by minimizing the cross-contamination and avoiding loss of in-process test samples at different steps of the test performed.

Two main types of cross-contamination that can occur in a laboratory set-up are:

 Organism contamination from the original sample
 Amplicon contamination, which can occur when aerosols from the amplified product enter the air and ultimately transfer to other sample tubes. Trace amounts of amplicon can initiate additional amplification reactions, potentially leading to false-positive results

Benefits of Automation:

In order to minimize the errors and maximize the accuracy of a test result organizations are implementing automations and the benefits of it include:
 Efficiency gains
 Improved turnaround time (TAT)
 Reduction in laboratory errors
 Overall improvement in patient care

In order to avoid the cross-contamination, the Laboratory design considerations may include:

1. A secluded area for sample preparation. Identify key variables that affect specimen collection and transport.
2. Describe the steps in a sample collection procedure.
3. Define carry-over contamination and describe methods to prevent its occurrence.
4. Describe methods for minimizing sample inhibition.
5. Identify sample preparation procedures that increase the risk of contamination.

In order to avoid the cross-contamination, the laboratory routine process may include:

 Avoiding moving freshly filled pipettes tips over open tubes.
 Use pipette tips that have aerosol plugs.
 Maintain physical separation between preamplified materials and amplified.
 Incorporate barriers such as oil or covers in the amplification reaction mix.
 Follow manufacturer's procedures for daily cleaning and decontamination.
 Identify sources of physical contamination, such as frequent touch-points on workstations, keyboards, telephones, etc.
 Change gloves frequently.
 Change lab coats frequently or utilize disposable gowns.
 Restrict gowns and equipment to single areas.
 Perform laboratory environmental "swipe" tests routinely to check for contamination.
Implement routine monitoring of technologist procedures to ensure strict compliance. To read more on this visit:

http://www.lab-education.org/review_ed_mod/mod01_slide38.htm

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FDA Launches Medical Device and Radiation-Emitting Product Transparency Web Site

BayBiotech.NET On April 19th, 2010 FDA launched he Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) Transparency Web site in support of the agency’s Transparency Initiative. The Web site makes available new information about CDRH’s decision-making processes and displays this information in a more user-friendly format. The site includes new information such as basic information about medical devices and how FDA regulates those products, information about medical devices before and after the products are on the market, in a searchable database, information about the clinical studies and trials conducted to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of certain medical devices, memos from FDA employees explaining the reasons for the agency's decisions about medical device manufacturer requests to make a significant change in components, materials, design, specification, software, color additive, and labeling of a medical device as well as a step-by-step guide for manufacturers of...

eCTD Submission Specifications

BayBiotech.NET The electronic Common Technical Document (eCTD) is an interface for the pharmaceutical industry to agency transfer of regulatory information. eCTD technical document format development was done by International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) Multidisciplinary Group 2 Expert Working Group (ICH M2 EWG). Details on the specification for the ICH eCTD can be found in the guidance document M2 eCTD: Electronic Common Technical Document Specification. Currently, eCTD is the preferred format for electronic submissions by U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Although originally the CTD and the eCTD were designed for marketing applications, they could apply equally to other submission types, including INDs, master files, advertising material, and promotional labeling. In June 2008, FDA has issued guidelines for organizing the electronic regulatory document filing using the eCTD tools. This guidance discusses issues related to the electronic submission of applications for hum...

Harmonization by Doing (HBD): Japan & U.S. Collaboration

BayBiotech.NET HBD is an international cooperative effort by Japan and US for regulatory convergence for Medical Devices. The efforts are focused on to develop global clinical trials and address regulatory barriers for timely device approvals. To address the needs for additional evaluation, the HBD initiative is a pilot project launched jointly by FDA and MHLW-PMDA for the premarket review of device cardiovascular technology. Instead of taking a theoretical approach to harmonization, HBD is focused on Proof of concept by utilizing parallel development, application submissions and review of actual medical device projects. HBD Study intends to collect and analyze regulatory submission data from multiple applications in the U.S. and Japan. The purpose of the study is to further understand differences that may exist with format and content, to define best practices and to improve globally harmonized processes. To read more about the HBD program, follow the link: http://www.fda.gov/M...