Impact on microbiology laboratory turn-around-times following process improvements and total laboratory automation.

Introduction: The impact of workflow changes and total laboratory automation (TLA) on microbiology culture processing time was evaluated in an academic-affiliated regional hospital. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of microbiological data in a research database was performed to compare turnaround time (TAT) for organism identification (ID) before and after implementation of TLA (2013 versus 2016, respectively). TAT was compared using chi-squared test for categorical variables and log-transformed t-test for continuous variables. Results: A total of 9,351 pre-defined common and clinically important positive mono-bacterial culture results were included in the analysis. Shorter TAT (hours) in 2016 compared to 2013 (p<0.0001) for positive result pathogen ID were observed in specimen types including blood (40.7 vs. 47.1), urine (30 vs 44), wound (39.6 vs. 60.2), respiratory (47.7 vs. 67), and all specimen types, combined (43.3 vs. 56.8). Although shorter TAT were not observed from all specimen categories for negative result pathogen ID, TAT for all specimen types, combined, was shorter (p<0.001) in 2016 compared to 2013 (94 vs. 101). Conclusions: Total laboratory automation and workflow changes-including process standardization-facilitate shorter organism ID TAT across specimen sources.


21
Total laboratory automation (TLA) of the clinical microbiology laboratory typically consists of automation for plating, incubation, reading, and processing of specimens. Studies have demonstrated the clinical value of automating 23 microbiological workflow including enhanced microbial growth, better colony isolation, reduced requirement for 24 bacterial subculture, and reduced time to results.(1-5) Previous work suggests that TLA can facilitate rapid reporting of 25 microbiology culture testing and thereby inform the management of infectious disease and lead to enhanced patient 26 care. (5)(6)(7) 27 28 This need for laboratory automation comes from an increased demand for clinical microbiology laboratory services, 29 despite growing staffing challenges.(8-10) Successful automation of a laboratory requires a thorough assessment and 30 appropriate refinement of all laboratory workflow practices that might impact system efficiency. (11,12) This includes 31 consideration of extending service delivery to a twenty-four hour day, seven days per week (24/7) schedule. (2,12,13) 32 Such changes facilitate the maximum benefit from laboratory automation.

34
Previous work demonstrated that TLA can also improve laboratory workflow, efficiency, and reproducibility (5,8,14,15) 35 while reducing errors.(3, 7) Staffing reductions of approximately 30% have been reported after automation despite a 36 27% increase in average laboratory-workload per day.(2) Thus, TLA addresses the challenges associated with a high 37 volume work load and allows managers to reallocate human resources to value-added activities.

39
In 2014, the University Medical Center (UMC), Lubbock, TX prioritized improvements to quality and efficiency in the 40 microbiology laboratory-including moving to TLA. After an assessment of available TLA solutions, UMC leadership 41 supported investment in the BD Kiestra™ TLA system (Kiestra; Becton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciencesa shorter post-TLA turnaround time (TAT). Although previous studies have evaluated the use of TLA for single 48 specimen sources,(4-6, 16-21) the goal here was to evaluate TAT across a wide range of specimen sources.

49
. CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.19.20213975 doi: medRxiv preprint TLA-related issues, such as patient charting based on the previous collection day. Related to charting, discussion items 96 included any changes in test selection and result interpretation based on TLA implementation. Laboratory updates 97 were provided to physician/clinician groups at team meetings throughout the TLA implementation process. Post 98 implementation meetings revealed the physician/clinician perspectives on progress based on initial goal setting for 99 processes including reporting and charting, and offered feedback to the laboratory for continued improvement.

101
Pre and Post-TLA sample processing continuous variables was utilized for comparisons. A two-tailed p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically 154 significant. All analyses were conducted using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

155
. CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.19.20213975 doi: medRxiv preprint d depict the comparison of cumulative distribution of TAT for positive IDs for the four most common specimen sources 160 (blood, urine, wound, and respiratory; all P<0.05). For blood specimens, the ID TAT was 53% (2016)

276
. CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020October 21, . . https://doi.org/10.1101October 21, /2020 doi: medRxiv preprint the manuscript and agree to be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of this work..

289
. CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020 13 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.19.20213975 doi: medRxiv preprint . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.19.20213975 doi: medRxiv preprint . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.19.20213975 doi: medRxiv preprint  . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020October 21, . . https://doi.org/10.1101October 21, /2020 doi: medRxiv preprint Tables  Table 1   Table 1   . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.19.20213975 doi: medRxiv preprint . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.19.20213975 doi: medRxiv preprint Supplemental Figure 1 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted October 21, 2020. . https://doi.org/10. 1101/2020