Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Laboratories”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1975

Laboratory services for mycobacterial diseases.

The philosophy of the recently proposed "Levels of Laboratory Service" program, which will be so vital to the conduct of a successful outpatient tuberculosis treatment and control program, is presented. The hallmark of this program is the decentralization of the diagnostic/monitoring services as they involve laboratory participation. In the long run this could mean more efficient operation, more reliable reporting, and probably less work for the participating laboratories. The greater emphasis on smear examination (Level I) as a monitoring tool will mean fewer cultures, thereby lessening the load for those laboratories that once went through countless clinically requested exercises of repetitively proving by culture the existence of M. tuberculosis in a given patient. Doubtless, the bulk of the work will be conducted in Level II laboratories; but here, too, identification of the most easily defined pathogen, M. tuberculosis, will minimize the over-all workload for these investigators while decreasing their concern about mycobacteria other than tubercle bacilli. Expertise gained in frequent repetitions of a limited number of tests (niacin, nitrate reduction, and pH 7/68 degrees C catalase) will ensure reliable speciation of the clinically most important Mycobacterium. The work of Level III laboratories should eventually be reduced primarily to organisms other than M. tuberculosis, thereby ensuring that a number of highly competent reference institutions will not only attain proficiency in taxonomic aspects of mycobacteria, but will also reflect the regional picture of the changing patterns in mycobacterial pathogens of man. Participation of laboratories in proficiency testing programs will encourage top-level performance in all areas. Additionally, such testing programs will serve a teaching role; a laboratory need not feel "locked in" at a given service level, but may increase its proficiency and move up a step in terms of the service it provides. In contrast, no laboratory need feel compelled to increase its activities; if daily workloads limit the extent of their involvement with mycobacteria, these laboratories can be confident that other institutions are providing needed services. The success of the entire "Levels of Laboratory Service" program depends on the recognition by individual laboratories of their own workload limitation, the directed motivation of personnel, and the maintenance of a free and open pipeline of communication to laboratories at the next higher level of service.

Bacteriological Techniques↗
PubMed2026

Survey of diagnostic laboratories highlights need for improved standards in somatic genomic testing and reporting.

There is a growing international need to support somatic genomic testing, standardised variant curation and improved patient access to molecular profiling for somatic conditions, including cancer. We conducted a survey of scope, curation, reporting and sharing practices of diagnostic laboratories performing somatic testing in Australia and New Zealand. Laboratories with accreditation (n = 41) were invited in 2023 to complete a semi-structured, 25-question interview. Responses were received for 27 laboratories (66% response rate) offering solid tumour, haematological malignancy and non-cancer services. Only 36% of laboratories offered tests capturing the full breadth of variants, from single-nucleotide variants to gene fusions. Knowledge sharing was rare, with only one laboratory submitting variant classifications to a public knowledge base. Most laboratories (96%) conducted somatic testing in oncology. Of cancer laboratories, 35% offered testing considered capable of comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). Almost half of cancer laboratories had already adopted the 2022 ClinGen/CGC/VICC oncogenicity guidelines, and 84% were using AMP/ASCO/CAP 2017 clinical significance guidelines. Only 47% of mixed discipline cancer laboratories reported biomarkers such as tumour mutational burden, with wide variation in reporting of matched therapy options. Our study has generated a unique overview of somatic laboratory practices in the region, and areas for global standardisation in somatic molecular testing and reporting. We also provide a model for practice and guideline uptake assessment, for application by other country-wide networks. This is particularly relevant in anticipation of CGP mainstreaming, with the increasing complexity of sequencing interpretation for laboratories and clinicians.

Humans↗
PubMed1977

[Central accounting as a model of laboratory diagnosis].

From the experiences in the field of scientific organisation of the last years results a laboratory-diagnostic model with an automatic laboratory, a district laboratory and larger central units, so-called coordination laboratories which work together with about 10 to 20 laboratories and guarantee an up-to-date diagnostic spectre for the whole territory. Apart from the increasing investigation frequency, a constant dilatation of the diagnostic spectre and improved quality control of structural conditions must be taken into consideration. The constructed model which demands the collaboration of all institutions meets these critical problems. A central balancing should also extend to the personal and technical apparative capacity. Apart from this the system is to be extended by further automation in the sense of a machine activity with improvement by control and regulation processes. An electronic data processing improves the functional capacity only when the analytic data processing has achieved a high level. The cooperation in the field of laboratory diagnostics is not only a task in scientific organisation, but in the same way also scientific problems are solved together. The requirements increasing in qualitative and quantitative respect may optimally be fulfilled only by the two partners, clinic and laboratory. With increasing independence the laboratories should in scientific and organizational respect remain a place of meeting for laboratory scientist and physician.

Clinical Laboratory Techniques↗