Implementing a laboratory automation system: experience of a large clinical laboratory

Laboratories today face increasing pressure to automate their operations as they are challenged by a continuing increase in workload, need to reduce expenditure, and difficulties in recruitment of experienced technical staff. Was the implementation of a laboratory automation system (LAS) in the Clinical Biochemistry Laboratory at Singapore General Hospital successful? There is no simple answer, so the following topics comparing and contrasting pre- and post-LAS have been explored: turnaround time (TAT), laboratory errors, and staff satisfaction. The benefits and limitations of LAS from the laboratory experience were also reviewed. The mean TAT for both stat and routine samples decreased post-LAS (30% and 13.4%, respectively). In the 90th percentile TAT chart, a 29% reduction was seen in the processing of stat samples on the LAS. However, no significant difference in the 90th percentile TAT was observed with routine samples. It was surprising to note that laboratory errors increased post-LAS. Considerable effort was needed to overcome the initial difficulties associated with adjusting to a new system, new software, and new working procedures. Although some of the known advantages and limitations of LAS have been validated, the claimed benefits such as improvements in TAT, laboratory errors, and staff morale were not evident in the initial months.