Table 3.

Variation in laboratory systems’ result reporting

Differences in Result Entry by Area of the Clinical Laboratory
Core (chemistry/hematology)/generalist	Blood bank/microbiology/molecular
• Process a large number of automated tests ○ “We aren’t manually doing a lot of things anymore, so I mean technology has changed […] the ability to quickly produce results within a timelier manner because of the automation” ∼RED. • Driven by autoverification ○ “70%–75% of the samples” (INDIGO) have their results autoverified into the EHR. ○ “if it is nonreactive it goes directly to the LIS and into the patient’s result and gets autoverified. But if it’s you know if it’s a reactive, there’s a hard stop on it and doesn’t get sent out” ∼BURGUNDY.	• Autoverification was minimally or not at all implemented ○ “[E]very result is entered into the patient’s medical record number not necessarily manually but somebody has to look at it so it might transition from the instrument into the LIS […] before the results are saved and then further moved into the electronic health record” ∼GRAY. • Tests can have serious implications for patients, were diagnostic or complex in nature, or required pathology review ○ “we have numerous complicated testing, we do FISH, we do flow cytometry and we do next generation sequencing testing, and all of those results are given to a pathologist for their interpretation” ∼MAGENTA.

Differences in Result Entry by Area of the Clinical Laboratory

Core (chemistry/hematology)/generalist

Blood bank/microbiology/molecular

• Process a large number of automated tests
- ○ “We aren’t manually doing a lot of things anymore, so I mean technology has changed […] the ability to quickly produce results within a timelier manner because of the automation” ∼RED.
• Driven by autoverification
- ○ “70%–75% of the samples” (INDIGO) have their results autoverified into the EHR.
- ○ “if it is nonreactive it goes directly to the LIS and into the patient’s result and gets autoverified. But if it’s you know if it’s a reactive, there’s a hard stop on it and doesn’t get sent out” ∼BURGUNDY.

• Autoverification was minimally or not at all implemented
- ○ “[E]very result is entered into the patient’s medical record number not necessarily manually but somebody has to look at it so it might transition from the instrument into the LIS […] before the results are saved and then further moved into the electronic health record” ∼GRAY.
• Tests can have serious implications for patients, were diagnostic or complex in nature, or required pathology review
- ○ “we have numerous complicated testing, we do FISH, we do flow cytometry and we do next generation sequencing testing, and all of those results are given to a pathologist for their interpretation” ∼MAGENTA.

Notes: LIS, laboratory information system.