What factors are associated with improvements in productivity in clinical laboratories in the Asia Pacific Region?

Abstract

IntroductionClinical laboratories usually have a quality management system such as ISO 15189, which provides a framework for quality and competence to perform medical testing and internal systems such as audit and nonconformance to ensure consistent processes. However, organizations need to have access to internal procedures and external competitors' performance to improve their operations. These are often seen as commercial or areas where it is difficult to agree on an acceptable goal. MethodIn 2019, 1158 laboratories from 17 countries/regions in the Asia Pacific Region answered the survey, including 399 Chinese sites. The survey collected information on quality, turnaround time and productivity. ResultsMedian productivity for laboratories in the Asia Pacific Region not including Chinese sites was 25 samples/FTE/day for small laboratories (workload: <250 samples/day), 100 for medium-sized laboratories (workload: 251–1000 samples/day) and 220 for large laboratories (workload: >1001 samples/day). The parameters associated with increased productivity in some laboratories were automation, middleware, Lean Six Sigma quality improvement activities and International Accreditation. ConclusionThis survey provides evidence of an association of quality improvement activities on laboratory productivity. There are differences in the effect of these activities in Chinese and non-Chinese laboratories in the Asia Pacific Region. The survey confirmed that the implementation of automation is associated with increased median productivity in all sites. Implementation of Lean Six Sigma and International Accreditation is associated with increased productivity in large laboratories.