Comparison of Effectiveness between Blood Bank Automation System and Manual Method for ABO-RhD Blood Typing and Antibody Screening Test in a Single Center.
- Author:
Yoon Kyung SONG
1
;
Tae Kyu AN
;
Joo Young HWANG
;
Hyo Eun SHIM
;
Do Hoon LEE
;
Sun Young KONG
Author Information
1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea. ksy@ncc.re.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Blood bank automation system;
Turnaround time;
Blood typing and antibody screening test
- MeSH:
Automation*;
Blood Banks*;
Blood Grouping and Crossmatching*;
Depreciation;
Emergencies;
Mass Screening*
- From:Korean Journal of Blood Transfusion
2014;25(2):93-98
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: The automation system for blood typing and antibody screening has been developed and is now used widely. In this study, we evaluated the economic effectiveness between automation system QWALYS-3 (DIAGAST, Loos Cedex, France) and manual testing. METHODS: Clinical samples from March 2012 were used for comparison of the costs and TAT for ABO-RhD blood typing and antibody screening. The costs included those of materials (reagents and consumables), labor, and equipment depreciation. TAT was analyzed for either blood typing only for one, 16, and 32 samples or blood typing and antibody screening for the same number of samples. RESULTS: The blood typing TAT for one, 16, and 32 samples was 4.5, 35.1, and 70.1 minutes by manual and 24.0, 36.0, and 38.1 minutes by automated system. Both blood typing and antibody screening TAT for one, 16, and 32 samples was 27.5, 75.0, and 129.9 minutes by manual and 45.0, 52.0, and 54.0 minutes by automation. CONCLUSION: The blood automation system reduced TAT only for the batch test, therefore, when using the automation system, blood bank test size and emergency situation should be considered.
