Time-and-motion tool for the assessment of working time in tuberculosis laboratories: a multicentre study
File(s)time and motion study apr 2018 s17.pdf (449 KB)
Published version
Author(s)
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
SETTING: Implementation of novel diagnostic assays in tuberculosis (TB) laboratory diagnosis requires effective management of time and resources.
OBJECTIVE: To further develop and assess at multiple centres a time-and-motion (T&M) tool as an objective means for recording the actual time spent on running laboratory assays.
DESIGN: Multicentre prospective study conducted in six European Union (EU) reference TB laboratories.
RESULTS: A total of 1060 specimens were tested using four laboratory assays. The number of specimens per batch varied from one to 60; a total of 64 recordings were performed. Theoretical hands-on times per specimen (TTPS) in h:min:s for Xpert® MTB/RIF, mycobacterial interspersed repetitive unit-variable number of tandem repeats genotyping, Ziehl-Neelsen staining and manual fluorescence microscopy were respectively 00:33:02 ± 00:12:32, 00:13:34 ± 00:03:11, 00:09:54 ± 00:00:53 and 00:06:23 ± 00:01:36. Variations between laboratories were predominantly linked to the time spent on reporting and administrative procedures. Processing specimens in batches could help save time in highly automated assays (e.g., line-probe) (TTPS 00:14:00 vs. 00:09:45 for batches comprising 7 and 31 specimens, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The T&M tool can be considered a universal and objective methodology contributing to workload assessment in TB diagnostic laboratories. Comparison of workload between laboratories could help laboratory managers justify their resource and personnel needs for the implementation of novel, time-saving, cost-effective technologies, as well as identify areas for improvement.
OBJECTIVE: To further develop and assess at multiple centres a time-and-motion (T&M) tool as an objective means for recording the actual time spent on running laboratory assays.
DESIGN: Multicentre prospective study conducted in six European Union (EU) reference TB laboratories.
RESULTS: A total of 1060 specimens were tested using four laboratory assays. The number of specimens per batch varied from one to 60; a total of 64 recordings were performed. Theoretical hands-on times per specimen (TTPS) in h:min:s for Xpert® MTB/RIF, mycobacterial interspersed repetitive unit-variable number of tandem repeats genotyping, Ziehl-Neelsen staining and manual fluorescence microscopy were respectively 00:33:02 ± 00:12:32, 00:13:34 ± 00:03:11, 00:09:54 ± 00:00:53 and 00:06:23 ± 00:01:36. Variations between laboratories were predominantly linked to the time spent on reporting and administrative procedures. Processing specimens in batches could help save time in highly automated assays (e.g., line-probe) (TTPS 00:14:00 vs. 00:09:45 for batches comprising 7 and 31 specimens, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The T&M tool can be considered a universal and objective methodology contributing to workload assessment in TB diagnostic laboratories. Comparison of workload between laboratories could help laboratory managers justify their resource and personnel needs for the implementation of novel, time-saving, cost-effective technologies, as well as identify areas for improvement.
Date Issued
2018-04-01
Date Acceptance
2017-11-20
Citation
International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 2018, 22 (4), pp.444-451
ISSN
1027-3719
Publisher
International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease
Start Page
444
End Page
451
Journal / Book Title
International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease
Volume
22
Issue
4
Copyright Statement
© 2018 Mathys et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
License URL
Sponsor
Imperial College Trust
Grant Number
WMNF_P71650
Subjects
1102 Cardiovascular Medicine And Haematology
Microbiology
Publication Status
Published
Date Publish Online
2018-03-22