PubMed · 6825287
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
K Doetsch. 1983. Validating new methods.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6825287/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The author gives an outline of the assumed development of clinical biochemical examinations in future decades based on the development during the past 40 years. The development of biochemical analyzers will probably mean more perfect robotization; the increase in capacity (number of tests performed per hour) probably will not result from more rapid individual analyses (the rate of 900 tests/hour is probably optimal) but the capacity will be increased by doubling and trebling of critical elements (photometry or technique of measurements, pipetting etc.). Probably the volume of blood samples will not be reduces (to less than 1-2 microliters); however, amplification techniques will be used far more (as at present the polymerase chain reaction and others (for replication of cellular substances such as DNA). There will be a shift and greater use of "in vivo" techniques such as magnetic resonance spectroscopy and examinations using biosensors (because of the possibility and in particular expedience of examining some analytes continuously). The examined spectrum will be extended by further substances (in particular those with a short-term existence such as e.g. cytokines, selectins, adhesive molecules etc.; manifestations of circadian dynamics will be followed up much more e.g. in tumours, or chronopharmacokinetics of some drugs. A great development may be foreseen in the sphere of the use of computer technique for evaluation and communication of laboratory data and other data on the patient. For consultations global (or at least regional) computer networks will be much more widely used.
OBJECTIVE: This article will review the advancements and new developments being made in (1) advanced computers, (2) microtechnology, (3) advanced immunodiagnostics, (4) neural networks, and (5) molecular biology. The influence of these technologies and their products on clinical laboratories is also discussed. CONCLUSION: Significant evolutionary and revolutionary technological changes are occurring in a number of scientific and engineering disciplines that impact the medical profession. As a consequence of this era of rapid change, the discipline of Clinical Laboratory Science is undergoing a "technological explosion" which is having a significant and profound effect on how clinical laboratories of today and tomorrow are and will be staffed, equipped, and operated.
Occupational exposure limits (OELs) issued in the US by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) require measurements of toxic substances in air rather than in biological samples. Most of OSHA's limits were adopted from the 1968 list of the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Values (TLVs). Although there are no formal requirements to monitor exposures to these substances, it is implicit in the standards that air sampling will be performed. Of the 13 OELs which OSHA has set de novo, 2 (i.e., those for lead and cadmium) require biomonitoring after air sampling has identified the heavily exposed workers. OSHA appears to value biomonitoring in some circumstances but has apparently not found a consistent rationale for using biomarkers to set and enforce its standards. This paper discusses 2 valuable features of biomarkers which should be exploited by OSHA to further its regulatory agenda. The first relates to controversies associated with dose rate which have come into play in setting short-term exposure limits (STELs) when acute effects do not provide the necessary justification. OSHA has not provided evidence that its STELs are needed to reduce the risks of disease (as in the cases of benzene and ethylene oxide). By investigating the exposure-biomarker relationship, it is possible to determine whether the rate of exposure has any influence on the uptake and elimination of toxic substances and, therefore, whether STELs is needed. This is illustrated with data from 2 studies on styrene exposure. The second feature concerns biomonitoring as the primary means of exposure assessment in situations where the biomarker is accumulated over months or years (as in the cases of lead and cadmium). Using data from the lead-battery industry, it is shown that 'correct' compliance decisions are more likely to arise from evaluation of blood lead measurements than from traditional air monitoring.