Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 15, 2026
Multiplexed Fluorometric ImmunoAssay Testing Methodology and Troubleshooting
Published on: December 12, 2011
Clinical laboratory radioimmunoassay usage
1Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock 79430, USA.
Objectives:
To determine the extent of radioimmunoassay utilization in clinical laboratories in the state of Texas; to ascertain what methods have replaced it as an analytical tool; to identify trends and elicit comments regarding attitudes toward radioimmunoassay; and to ascertain the extent of instruction of radioimmunoassay principles required in clinical laboratory science curricula.
Design:
Mailed, written survey designed by the authors.
Participants:
Laboratory managers or directors of 203 clinical pathology laboratories in Texas.
Main Outcome Measure:
Responses to seven forced-choice items, prompting information regarding laboratory type and size, extent of radioimmunoassay use, benefits or radioimmunoassay, and replacement technologies; a single item that elicited responses and opinions regarding general attitudes about radioimmunoassay and its place in clinical laboratory science curriculum.
Data Source:
Clinical laboratory managers or directors in the state of Texas.
Results:
A total of 203 surveys were mailed within 127 respondents, yielding a response rate of 63%. The majority (77%) of clinical laboratories surveyed no longer use radioimmunoassay as a diagnostic tool with the predominant reason being the availability and affordability of automated enzyme immunoassays. Time-consuming recordkeeping was another common reason for abandoning the technique. Enzyme immunoassays were by far the most common method replacing radioimmunoassay. Comments reflected the general attitude that radioimmunoassay is a technique of the past in the clinical laboratory. A variety of views were elicited regarding the education of the principles of RIA to clinical laboratory science students.
Conclusion:
Radioimmunoassay, although a viable assay in some situations, has been abandoned as an analytical tool in most clinical laboratories in Texas. Current users are unhappy with the amount of paperwork that accompanies use of the technology, while non-users consider non-isotopic assays equivalent in sensitivity to RIA. In regard to information presented to clinical laboratory science students, the advent of molecular diagnostic techniques requires continued instruction in the principles of radioactivity, although not radioimmunoassay.
