Abstract
BackgroundMost errors in laboratory medicine occur in the pre-analytical phase of the total testing process. Phlebotomy, a crucial step in the pre-analytical phase influencing laboratory results and patient outcome, calls for quality assurance procedures and automation in order to prevent errors and ensure patient safety. MethodsWe compared the performance of a new small, automated device, the ProTube Inpeco, designed for use in phlebotomy with a complete traceability of the process, with a centralized automated system, BC ROBO. ResultsProTube was used for 15,010 patients undergoing phlebotomy with 48,776 tubes being labeled. The mean time and standard deviation (SD) for blood sampling was 3:03 (min:sec; SD±1:24) when using ProTube, against 5:40 (min:sec; SD±1:57) when using BC ROBO. The mean number of patients per hour managed at each phlebotomy point was 16±3 with ProTube, and 10±2 with BC ROBO. No tubes were labeled erroneously or incorrectly, even if process failure occurred in 2.8% of cases when ProTube was used. ConclusionsThanks to its cutting edge technology, the ProTube has many advantages over BC ROBO, above all in verifying patient identity, and in allowing a reduction in both identification error and tube mislabeling.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
