Conversion of a classical microbiology laboratory to a total automation laboratory enhanced by the application of lean principles
Open accessAbstract
Laboratory automation in microbiology improves productivity and reduces sample turnaround times (TATs). However, its full potential can be unlocked through the optimization of workflows by adopting lean principles. This study aimed to explore the relative impact of laboratory automation and continuous improvement events (CIEs) on productivity and TATs. Laboratory automation took place in November 2020 and consisted of the introduction of WASPLab and VITEK MS systems. CIEs were run in May and September 2021. Before the conversion, the laboratory processed about ~492 samples on weekdays and had 10 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff for a productivity of 49 samples/FTE/day. In March 2021, after laboratory automation, the caseload went up to ~621 while the FTEs decreased to 8.5, accounting for productivity improvement to 73 samples/FTE/day. The hypothetical productivity went up to 110 samples/FTE/day following CIEs, meaning that the laboratory could at that point deal with a caseload increase to ~935 with unchanged FTEs. Laboratory conversion also led to an improvement in TATs for all sample types. For vaginal swabs and urine samples, median TATs decreased from 70.3 h [interquartile range (IQR): 63.5–93.1] and 73.7 h (IQR: 35.6–50.7) to 48.2 h (IQR: 44.8–67.7) and 40.0 h (IQR: 35.6–50.7), respectively. Automation alone was responsible for 37.2% and 75.8% of TAT reduction, respectively, while the remaining reduction of 62.8% and 24.2%, respectively, was achieved due to CIEs. The laboratory reached productivity and TAT goals predefined by the management after CIEs. In conclusion, automation substantially improved productivity and TATs, while the subsequent implementation of lean management further unlocked the potential of laboratory automation. IMPORTANCE: In this study, we combined total laboratory automation with lean management to show that appropriate laboratory work organization enhanced the benefit of the automation and substantially contributed to productivity improvements. Globally, the rapid availability of accurate results in the setting of a clinical microbiology laboratory is part of patient-centered approaches to treat infections and helps the implementation of antibiotic stewardship programs backed by the World Health Organization. Locally, from the point of view of laboratory management, it is important to find ways of maximizing the benefits of the use of technology, as total laboratory automation is an expensive investment.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The implementation of total laboratory automation increases efficiency (reducing turnaround times and increasing productivity) and improves testing quality, sample management, traceability, and operator's safety.
“The implementation of total laboratory automation increases efficiency (reducing turnaround times (TAT) and increasing productivity) and improves the testing quality, sample management, traceability, and operator’s safety [2].”
From Lab efficiency and improvements in the management of bloodstream infections: a before and after study (2025) · cites this paper as [2]
The Introduction states that total laboratory automation increases efficiency, improves testing quality, and lowers biological risk to operators. The Abstract and Discussion also report improvements in turnaround time and productivity. However, the Introduction says automation offers a *possibility* of better sample management and traceability; the claim presents those improvements as certain. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Mutters, N. T., Hodiamont, C. J., Jong, M. D. D., Overmeijer, H. P. J., Boogaard, M. V. D., & E.Visser, C. (2014) · Annals of Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.3343/alm.2014.34.2.111 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Benefits Derived from Full Laboratory Automation in Microbiology: a Tale of Four Laboratories
Culbreath, K., Piwonka, H., Korver, J., & Noorbakhsh, M. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.01969-20 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Graham, M., Tilson, L., Streitberg, R., Hamblin, J., & Korman, T. M. (2016) · Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease · doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2016.06.020 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- [1]Bailey AL, Ledeboer N, Burnham C-A. 2019. Clinical microbiology is growing up: the total laboratory automation revolution. Clin Chem 65: 634– 643. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2017.274522 30518664 · DOI
- [2]Cherkaoui A, Schrenzel J. 2022. Total laboratory automation for rapid detection and identification of microorganisms and their antimicrobial resistance profiles. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 12: 807668. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2022.807668 35186794 PMC8851030 · DOI
- [3]Bourbeau PP, Ledeboer NA. 2013. Automation in clinical microbiology. J Clin Microbiol 51: 1658– 1665. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00301-13 23515547 PMC3716104 · DOI
- [5]Maurer FP, Christner M, Hentschke M, Rohde H. 2017. Advances in rapid identification and susceptibility testing of bacteria in the clinical microbiology laboratory: implications for patient care and antimicrobial stewardship programs. Infect Dis Rep 9: 6839. doi: 10.4081/idr.2017.6839 28458798 PMC5391540 · DOI · Paper page
- [6]Baker J, Timm K, Faron M, Ledeboer N, Culbreath K. 2020. Digital image analysis for the detection of group B Streptococcus from chromid strepto B medium using PhenoMatrix algorithms. J Clin Microbiol 59: e01902-19. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01902-19 33087433 PMC7771474 · DOI · Paper page
- [7]Faron ML, Buchan BW, Relich RF, Clark J, Ledeboer NA. 2020. Evaluation of the WASPLab segregation software to automatically analyze urine cultures using routine blood and MacConkey Agars. J Clin Microbiol 58: e01683-19. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01683-19 31941690 PMC7098764 · DOI · Paper page
- [8]Faron ML, Buchan BW, Samra H, Ledeboer NA. 2019. Evaluation of WASPLab software to automatically read chromID CPS elite Agar for reporting of urine cultures. J Clin Microbiol 58: e00540-19. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00540-19 31694967 PMC6935927 · DOI
- [9]Antonios K, Croxatto A, Culbreath K. 2021. Current state of laboratory automation in clinical microbiology laboratory. Clin Chem 68: 99– 114. doi: 10.1093/clinchem/hvab242 34969105 · DOI
- [10]Lippi G, Da Rin G. 2019. Advantages and limitations of total laboratory automation: a personal overview. Clin Chem Lab Med 57: 802– 811. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2018-1323 30710480 · DOI
- [11]Burckhardt I. 2018. Laboratory automation in clinical microbiology. Bioengineering (Basel) 5: 102. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering5040102 30467275 PMC6315553 · DOI
- [13]Johnson PM, Patterson CJ, OʼConnell MP. 2013. Lean methodology: an evidence-based practice approach for healthcare improvement. Nurse Pract 38: 1– 7. doi: 10.1097/01.NPR.0000437576.14143.b9 24253524 · DOI
- [14]Clark DM, Silvester K, Knowles S. 2013. Lean management systems: creating a culture of continuous quality improvement. J Clin Pathol 66: 638– 643. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2013-201553 23757036 · DOI
- [15]Bailey AL, Burnham C-A. 2019. Reducing the time between inoculation and first-read of urine cultures using total lab automation significantly reduces turn-around-time of positive culture results with minimal loss of first-read sensitivity. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 38: 1135– 1141. doi: 10.1007/s10096-019-03512-3 30806903 · DOI
- [16]Choi Q, Kim HJ, Kim JW, Kwon GC, Koo SH. 2018. Manual versus automated streaking system in clinical microbiology laboratory: performance evaluation of Previ Isola for blood culture and body fluid samples. J Clin Lab Anal 32: e22373. doi: 10.1002/jcla.22373 29314254 PMC6817097 · DOI
- [17]Croxatto A, Dijkstra K, Prod’hom G, Greub G. 2015. Comparison of inoculation with the InoqulA and WASP automated systems with manual inoculation. J Clin Microbiol 53: 2298– 2307. doi: 10.1128/JCM.03076-14 25972424 PMC4473203 · DOI
- [18]Froment P, Marchandin H, Vande Perre P, Lamy B. 2014. Automated versus manual sample inoculations in routine clinical microbiology: a performance evaluation of the fully automated InoqulA instrument. J Clin Microbiol 52: 796– 802. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02341-13 24353001 PMC3957760 · DOI
- [19]Mischnik A, Mieth M, Busch CJ, Hofer S, Zimmermann S. 2012. First evaluation of automated specimen inoculation for wound swab samples by use of the Previ Isola system compared to manual inoculation in a routine laboratory: finding a cost-effective and accurate approach. J Clin Microbiol 50: 2732– 2736. doi: 10.1128/JCM.05501-11 22692745 PMC3421514 · DOI
- [20]Quiblier C, Jetter M, Rominski M, Mouttet F, Böttger EC, Keller PM, Hombach M. 2016. Performance of copan WASP for routine urine microbiology. J Clin Microbiol 54: 585– 592. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02577-15 26677255 PMC4767997 · DOI
- [22]Strauss S, Bourbeau PP. 2015. Impact of introduction of the BD Kiestra InoqulA on urine culture results in a hospital clinical microbiology laboratory. J Clin Microbiol 53: 1736– 1740. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00417-15 25740766 PMC4400793 · DOI
- [23]Theparee T, Das S, Thomson Jr RB. 2018. Total laboratory automation and matrix-assisted laser desorption Ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry improve turnaround times in the clinical microbiology laboratory: a retrospective analysis. J Clin Microbiol 56: e01242-17. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01242-17 29118171 PMC5744220 · DOI
- [25]Da Rin G, Zoppelletto M, Lippi G. 2016. Integration of diagnostic microbiology in a model of total laboratory automation. Lab Med 47: 73– 82. doi: 10.1093/labmed/lmv007 26715609 · DOI
- [26]Zhang W, Wu S, Deng J, Liao Q, Liu Y, Xiong L, Shu L, Yuan Y, Xiao Y, Ma Y, Kang M, Li D, Xie Y. 2021. Total laboratory automation and three shifts reduce turnaround time of cerebrospinal fluid culture results in the Chinese clinical microbiology laboratory. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 11: 765504. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.765504 34926317 PMC8675566 · DOI
- [27]Cherkaoui A, Renzi G, Martischang R, Harbarth S, Vuilleumier N, Schrenzel J. 2020. Impact of total laboratory automation on turnaround times for urine cultures and screening specimens for MRSA, ESBL, and VRE carriage: retrospective comparison with manual workflow. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 10: 552122. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2020.552122 33194794 PMC7664309 · DOI
- [28]Yarbrough ML, Lainhart W, McMullen AR, Anderson NW, Burnham C-A. 2018. Impact of total laboratory automation on workflow and specimen processing time for culture of urine specimens. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 37: 2405– 2411. doi: 10.1007/s10096-018-3391-7 30269180 · DOI
- [29]Cornes MP, Shetty C. 2018. Mechanisms of measuring key performance indicators in the pre-analytical phase. J Lab Precis Med 3: 57. doi: 10.21037/jlpm.2018.05.06 · DOI
- [30]Cherkaoui A, Renzi G, Viollet A, Fleischmann M, Metral-Boffod L, Dominguez-Amado D, Vuilleumier N, Schrenzel J. 2020. Implementation of the WASPLab and first year achievements within a university hospital. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 39: 1527– 1534. doi: 10.1007/s10096-020-03872-1 32248509 · DOI
- [31]Leber AL, Peterson E, Dien Bard J, Personnel S, Workforce Subcommittee ASfM. 2022. The hidden crisis in the times of COVID-19: critical shortages of medical laboratory professionals in clinical microbiology. J Clin Microbiol 60: e0024122. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00241-22 35658527 PMC9383190 · DOI
- [32]Thomson RB, McElvania E. 2019. Total laboratory automation: what is gained, what is lost, and who can afford it? Clin Lab Med 39: 371– 389. doi: 10.1016/j.cll.2019.05.002 31383263 · DOI
- [33]Cherkaoui A, Schorderet D, Azam N, Crudeli L, Fernandez J, Renzi G, Fischer A, Schrenzel J. 2022. Fully automated EUCAST rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) from positive blood cultures: diagnostic accuracy and implementation. J Clin Microbiol 60: e0089822. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00898-22 36173195 PMC9580353 · DOI
- [34]Heestermans R, Herroelen P, Emmerechts K, Vandoorslaer K, De Geyter D, Demuyser T, Wybo I, Piérard D, Muyldermans A. 2022. Validation of the colibri instrument for automated preparation of MALDI-TOF MS targets for yeast identification. J Clin Microbiol 60: e0023722. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00237-22 35703578 PMC9297811 · DOI
- [35]Novis DA. 2008. Reducing errors in the clinical laboratory: a lean production system approach. Lab Med 39: 521– 529. doi: 10.1309/XAER260DK5U9GM0W · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Paluch, M., Ettahar, N., Lagraulet, B., Cattoen, C., Rethore, E., Dubrulle, A., Abad, L., Canis, F., Wayenberg, L., Lambiotte, F., et al. (2025) · European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1007/s10096-025-05200-x · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Trigueiro, G., Oliveira, C., Rodrigues, A., Seabra, S., Pinto, R., Bala, Y., Gutiérrez Granado, M., Vallejo, S., Gonzalez, V., & Cardoso, C.
- Affiliations
- Joaquim Chaves Saúde (Portugal) (PT)
- bioMérieux (France) (FR)
- Lab Consultancy, bioMérieux, bioMérieux SA, Madrid, Spain
- Lab Consultancy, bioMérieux, bioMérieux SA, Lisbon, Portugal
- Corresponding author
- Rodrigues, Alexandra
- Bala, Yohann
- Venue
- Microbiology Spectrum
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2024-02-06
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- e0215323-e0215323
- ISSN
- 2165-0497 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10846136
- OpenAlex
- W4390954817
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 10
- FWCI
- 4.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Microbiology Spectrum (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
- Keywords
- laboratory automation, lean manufacturing, sample turnaround time, laboratory productivity, clinical microbiology laboratory, VITEK MS, workflow optimization, layoffs, vaginal swabs, urine samples, antibiotic stewardship, patient-centered care, infection control
- MeSH terms
- Female, Humans, Laboratories, Time Factors, Automation, Laboratory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review