Skip to main content
メニュー
Revvity logo
Contact us
JP
Revvity Sites Globally

Select your location.

*e-commerce not available for this region.

australia.webp Australia
austria.webp Austria
belgium.webp Belgium
brazil.webp Brazil *
canada.webp Canada
china.webp China *
denmark.webp Denmark
finland.webp Finland
france.webp France
germany.webp Germany
hong-kong.webp Hong Kong (China) *
india.webp India *
ireland.webp Ireland
italy.webp Italy
japan.webp Japan *
luxembourg.webp Luxembourg
mexico.webp Mexico *
netherlands.webp Netherlands
norway.webp Norway
philippines.webp Philippines *
republic of korea.webp Republic of Korea *
singapore.webp Singapore *
spain.webp Spain
sweden.webp Sweden
switzerland.webp Switzerland
thailand.webp Thailand *
uk.webp United Kingdom
usa.webp United States
Breadcrumb
...
  • ホーム
  • Blog
  • Automation
  • Improving reliability by reducing human errors.
Improving reliability by reducing human errors

Blog

Automation Integrated Lab Automation

Mar 25th 2024

2 min read

Improving reliability by reducing human errors.

Help us improve your Revvity blog experience!

Feedback

According to a study by Johns Hopkins, more than 250,000 people in the United States die every year because of medical mistakes, making it the third leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.1

60–70% of the critical medical decisions made by physicians are based on laboratory test results2, making accuracy of these results essential. The accuracy and reliability of these results depend on the quality of each step in the laboratory testing workflow. Errors in any of these steps may negatively affect safety and have the potential to damage an institution’s reputation, diminish confidence in their services, and increase total operating costs.

Pre-analytical errors account for up to 75% of laboratory errors.3 Pre-analytical errors occur during sample collection, transportation, storage, or processing. A review of recent publications shows that 2.23% of samples collected for analysis suffer from a human pre-analytical error.

Table 1. Compilation of most common pre-analytical errors indicate errors occur in 2.23% of clinical samples analyzed in these studies.4

Peer reviewed study Mis-labeled sample Hemolysed Wrong tube type Inadequate volume Clotted Total errors Total samples
Study 1 289 95 149 136 102 771 135,808
Study 2 203 607 N/A 36 N/A 846 96,358
Study 3 222 222 43 149 79 715 329,582
Study 4 49,802 16,460 16,038 14,772 7,7175 104,247 4,220,518
TOTALS 50,516 17,384 16,230 15,093 7,356 106,579 4,782,266
% of total errors 47% 16% 15% 14% 7% 100%  
% of total samples 1.06% 0.36% 0.34% 0.32% 0.15% 2.23%  
Reducing laboratory errors with automation

Automation improves the accuracy of laboratory tests by reducing human errors once the sample is received by the lab and by identifying errors occurring before the samples get there. Pre-analytical sample preparation automation and standardization helps reduce laboratory test errors and costs by automating the repetitive, error-prone, and bio-hazardous processes. Once a sample reaches the laboratory all processes can be automated and standardized from sample registration sample screening for analysis suitability, to setup for analysis, to the analysis itself. Errors including mis-labeled tubes, inadequate volume, incorrect tube type, and clotted or hemolyzed blood can all be identified and flagged as incorrect prior to analysis, reducing the chance of reporting incorrect results. Fully automated storage and retrieval of archived samples also reduce the potential for human errors.

References:
  1. Makary, M. A., & Daniel, M. (2016). Medical error—the third leading cause of death in the US. BMJ, i2139. doi:10.1136/bmj.i2139
  2. Forsman, L. R. (1992) Why is the laboratory an afterthought for managed care organizations, Clin Chem, 42, 813–816. PMID: 8653920.
  3. Bonini, P., Plebani, M., Ceriotti, F., et al. (2002) Errors in laboratory medicine. Clin Chem. 48:691-698.
  4. Upreti, S. (2013). Types and Frequency of Preanalytical Errors in Haematology Lab. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. doi:10.7860/jcdr/2013/6399.3587
  5. Chawla, R., Goswami, B., Tayal, D., & Mallika, V. (2010). Identification of the Types of Preanalytical Errors in the Clinical Chemistry Laboratory: 1-Year Study at G.B. Pant Hospital. Laboratory Medicine, 41(2), 89–92. doi: 10.1309/lm9jxzbmlsvjt9rk
  6. Carraro, P., & Plebani, M. (2007). Errors in a Stat Laboratory: Types and Frequencies 10 Years Later. Clinical Chemistry, 53(7), 1338–1342. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2007.088344
  7. Barak, M., & Jaschek, R. (2014). A new and effective way for preventing pre-analytical laboratory errors. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), 52(2). doi: 10.1515/cclm-2013-0597

For research use only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.

Help us improve your Revvity blog experience!

Feedback

Share this post:

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin
  • Twitter

続き Automation posts

The need for NGS automation for single-cell and spatial omics.
Read
Embracing modularity: flexible automation's role in drug discovery research.
Read
Speeding up sample prep TAT from tough research biospecimens
Read
line

Questions?
We’re here to help.

Contact us
Revvity Logo

©2025 Revvity - All rights reserved

Revvity is a trademark of Revvity, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.