title: Report of the results of the International Clinical Cytometry Society and American Society for Clinical Pathology workload survey of clinical flow cytometry laboratories.
abstract: Thorough review of current workload, staffing, and testing practices in clinical laboratories allows for optimization of laboratory efficiency and quality. This information is largely missing with regard to clinical flow cytometry laboratories. The purpose of this survey is to provide comprehensive, current, and accurate data on testing practices and laboratory staffing in clinical laboratories performing flow cytometric studies.
  
  
  
  Survey data was collected from flow cytometry laboratories through the ASCP website. Data was collected on the workload during a 1-year time period of full-time and part-time technical and professional (M.D./D.O./Ph.D. or equivalent) flow cytometry employees. Workload was examined as number of specimens and tubes per full time equivalent (FTE) technical and professional staff. Test complexity, test result interpretation, and reporting practices were also evaluated.
  
  
  
  There were 205 respondent laboratories affiliated predominantly with academic and health system institutions. Overall, 1,132 FTE employees were reported with 29% professional FTE employees and 71% technical. Fifty-one percent of the testing performed was considered high complexity and 49% was low complexity. The average number of tubes per FTE technologist was 1,194 per year and the average number of specimens per FTE professional was 1,659 per year. The flow cytometry reports were predominantly written by pathologists (57%) and were typically written as a separate report (58%).
  
  
  
  This survey evaluates the overall status of the current practice of clinical flow cytometry and provides a comprehensive dataset as a framework to help laboratory departments, directors, and managers make appropriate, cost-effective staffing decisions. © 2016 International Clinical Cytometry Society.
authors.affiliation: Department of Pathology, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
authors.forename: Kristy
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Wolniak
authors.affiliation: Department of Pathology, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
authors.forename: Charles
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Goolsby
authors.affiliation: Department of Pathology, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
authors.forename: Sarah
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Choi
authors.affiliation: Department of Evaluation, Measurement and Assessment, American Society for Clinical Pathology, Chicago, Illinois.
authors.forename: Asma
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Ali
authors.affiliation: Department of Evaluation, Measurement and Assessment, American Society for Clinical Pathology, Chicago, Illinois.
authors.forename: Nina
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Serdy
authors.affiliation: Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
authors.forename: Maryalice
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Stetler-Stevenson
mesh_terms: D064790:Clinical Laboratory Services; D005434:Flow Cytometry / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D006801:Humans; D007390:International Agencies; D007755:Laboratories, Hospital; D010338:Pathology, Clinical / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D012958:Societies, Scientific; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014481:United States; D000078329:Workforce; D016526:Workload / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*
keywords: flow cytometry; laboratory practice; survey data