[Laboratory unification: advantages and disadvantages for clinical microbiology].
This article aims to reflect on which areas or tasks of microbiology laboratories could be unified with those of clinical biochemistry, hematology, immunology or pathology laboratories to benefit patients and the health system, as well as the areas that should remain independent since their amalgamation would not only fail to provide a benefit but could even jeopardize the quality of microbiological diagnosis, and consequently patient care. To do this, the distinct analytic phases of diagnosis are analyzed, and the advantages and disadvantages of amalgamation are evaluated in each phase. The pros and cons of the unification of certain areas such as the computer system, occupational risk units, customer service, purchasing logistics, and materials storage, etc, are also discussed. Lastly, the effect of unification on urgent microbiology diagnosis is analyzed. Microbiological diagnosis should be unique. The microbiologist should perform an overall evaluation of the distinct techniques used for a particular patient, both those that involve direct diagnosis (staining, culture, antigen detection techniques or molecular techniques) and indirect diagnosis (antibody detection). Moreover, the microbiology laboratory should be independent, with highly trained technicians and specialists in microbiology that provide added value as experts in infection and as key figures in the process of establishing a correct etiological diagnosis.
Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, España. anandreu@vhebron.net
Antonia
A
Andreu
Lurdes
L
Matas
D007753:Laboratories / Q000458:organization & administration* / Q000592:standards; D008829:Microbiology