Workflow and Maintenance Characteristics of Five Automated Laboratory Instruments for the Diagnosis of Sexually Transmitted Infections

ABSTRACT The choice of a suitable automated system for a diagnostic laboratory depends on various factors. Comparative workflow studies provide quantifiable and objective metrics to determine hands-on time during specimen handling and processing, reagent preparation, return visits and maintenance, and test turnaround time and throughput. Using objective time study techniques, workflow characteristics for processing 96 and 192 tests were determined on m2000 RealTime (Abbott Molecular), Viper XTR (Becton Dickinson), cobas 4800 (Roche Molecular Diagnostics), Tigris (Hologic Gen-Probe), and Panther (Hologic Gen-Probe) platforms using second-generation assays for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. A combination of operational and maintenance steps requiring manual labor showed that Panther had the shortest overall hands-on times and Viper XTR the longest. Both Panther and Tigris showed greater efficiency whether 96 or 192 tests were processed. Viper XTR and Panther had the shortest times to results and m2000 RealTime the longest. Sample preparation and loading time was the shortest for Panther and longest for cobas 4800. Mandatory return visits were required only for m2000 RealTime and cobas 4800 when 96 tests were processed, and both required substantially more hands-on time than the other systems due to increased numbers of return visits when 192 tests were processed. These results show that there are substantial differences in the amount of labor required to operate each system. Assay performance, instrumentation, testing capacity, workflow, maintenance, and reagent costs should be considered in choosing a system.

[1]  E. Portillo,et al.  Comparison of Three Assays for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in SurePath Pap Samples and the Role of Pre- and Postcytology Testing , 2012, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[2]  Alessandra Amendola,et al.  Improving clinical laboratory efficiency: a time-motion evaluation of the Abbott m2000 RealTime and Roche COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan PCR systems for the simultaneous quantitation of HIV-1 RNA and HCV RNA , 2011, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[3]  R. Lillis,et al.  Performance of the cobas CT/NG Test Compared to the Aptima AC2 and Viper CTQ/GCQ Assays for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae , 2012, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[4]  Preeti Pancholi,et al.  Molecular methods and platforms for infectious diseases testing a review of FDA-approved and cleared assays. , 2011, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[5]  D. Whiley,et al.  Evaluation of the cobas 4800 CT/NG test for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae , 2010, Sexually Transmitted Infections.

[6]  J. Cuzick,et al.  Comparing the performance of six human papillomavirus tests in a screening population , 2013, British Journal of Cancer.

[7]  G. Horsman,et al.  Comparison of the BD Viper System With XTR Technology to the Gen-Probe APTIMA COMBO 2 Assay Using the TIGRIS DTS System for the Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Urine Specimens , 2012, Sexually transmitted diseases.

[8]  Robin A. Felder,et al.  Process Evaluation of a Fully Automated Molecular Diagnostics System , 2009 .

[9]  K. Beavis,et al.  Evaluation of automated COBAS AMPLICOR PCR system for detection of several infectious agents and its impact on laboratory management , 1996, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[10]  G. Horsman,et al.  Evaluation of Three Automated Nucleic Acid Amplification Systems for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in First-Void Urine Specimens , 2008, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[11]  B. Diedrich,et al.  Characteristics of the m2000 Automated Sample Preparation and Multiplex Real-Time PCR System for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae , 2007, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[12]  W. Kortlandt,et al.  Standardized comparison of processing capacity and efficiency of five new-generation immunoassay analyzers. , 2000, Clinical chemistry.

[13]  J. Mandrekar,et al.  Comparison of the Abbott RealTime Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 (HIV-1) Assay to the Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan HIV-1 Test: Workflow, Reliability, and Direct Costs , 2009, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[14]  S. Ratnam,et al.  Head-to-Head Comparison of Second-Generation Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae on Urine Samples from Female Subjects and Self-Collected Vaginal Swabs , 2014, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[15]  K. Chapin,et al.  Comparison of Aptima Trichomonas vaginalis Transcription-Mediated Amplification Assay and BD Affirm VPIII for Detection of T. vaginalis in Symptomatic Women: Performance Parameters and Epidemiological Implications , 2011, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[16]  J. Welsch,et al.  Performance of the Abbott RealTime CT/NG for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae , 2010, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.