Comparing Manual and Automated Sample Preparation Methods for Clinical Chemistry Analytes in hafr albatan KSA

Abstract

Clinical laboratories utilize a variety of analytical techniques to provide accurate and timely results that guide patient diagnosis and management. However, the pre-analytical sample preparation process is crucial for ensuring high quality test outcomes. Manual sample preparation tends to be labor-intensive while automated techniques promise improved efficiency and standardization. This paper reviews comparative studies on the two approaches specifically for preparing patient serum and plasma samples for common clinical chemistry testing in hospital laboratories. Searches of PubMed and Embase identified 12 studies comparing manual and automated sample preparation techniques for chemistry analytes. Outcomes evaluated include turnaround time, staff hands-on time, aliquoting errors, sample carryover, and test result variability. Automated sample preparation consistently demonstrated reduced turnaround and hands-on times across studies. Rates of aliquoting errors and sample carryover were lower with automation. However, differences in test result variability were less consistent between techniques based on analyte type and platform used. Overall, the evidence supports automated sample preparation as an efficient option to improve laboratory workflow for high volume chemistry testing while maintaining or improving quality. Further research should continue assessing impacts on result variation using rigorous direct comparison methods. Based on current data, automated sample preparation techniques appear promising for reducing errors and improving efficiency compared to traditional manual preparation for high volume clinical chemistry testing in hospital laboratories. Implementation may enhance management of heavy workloads as testing volumes rise, allowing clinicians faster access to results that guide prompt patient treatment decisions.