Heliyon (May 2024)
Comparison of the speed and quality of innovative and traditional pneumatic tube system transport outside of an emergency laboratory
Abstract
Background: Ensuring the rapidity and accuracy of emergency laboratory test results is especially important to save the lives of patients with acute and critical conditions. To better meet the needs of clinicians and patients, detection efficiency can be improved by reducing extra-laboratory sample turnaround times (TATs) through the use of innovative pneumatic tube system (PTS) transport for sample transport. However, concerns remain regarding the potential compromise of sample quality during PTS transit relative to that occurring with manual transportation. This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of an innovative PTS (Tempus600 PTS) relative to a traditional PTS in terms of sample transit time, sample quality, and the concordance of analytical results with those obtained from manually transported samples. Methods: In total, 30 healthy volunteers aged >18 years were recruited for this study, conducted for five consecutive days. Venous blood samples were collected from six volunteers per day at fixed timepoints. From each volunteer, nine blood samples were collected into tubes with tripotassium ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid anticoagulant, tubes with 3.2 % sodium citrate, and serum tubes with separation gel (n = 3 each) and subjected to all tests conducted in the emergency laboratory in our hospital. 270 blood samples from 30 healthy volunteers were transported and analyzed, yielding 6300 test results. The blood samples were divided randomly into three groups (each containing one tube of each type) and transported to the emergency laboratory manually and with Tempus600 PTS and conventional Swisslog PTS, respectively. The extra-laboratory TATs, sample quality, and test results of the transported blood samples were compared. Results: The sample quality and test results did not differ according to the delivery method. The TAT was much shorter with the Tempus600 than with the other two transport modes (58.40 ± 1.52 s vs. 1711.20 ± 77.56 s for manual delivery and 146.60 ± 1.82 s for the Swisslog PTS; P = 0.002). Conclusion: Blood sample transport with the Tempus600 PTS significantly reduced the extra-laboratory TAT without compromising sample quality or test result accuracy, thereby improving the efficiency of sample analysis and the services provided to clinicians and patients.
