Many modern laboratories, particularly those specializing in anatomic pathology, gastrointestinal (GI), and dermatology, are considering implementing a laboratory information system (LIS) to address regulatory compliance, data security, and sample integrity of tissue samples. Although labs understand the value of having an integrated system to improve their workflow and communication, they are understandably hesitant to embark on such a vast overhaul despite all the positive responses from end users.
According to a 2020 survey, 61% of LIS users profited from automating manual operations, 57% improved their sample management, and 46% saw a substantial increase in productivity. Over 36% of the respondents were pleased with their choice, and 44% said laboratory efficiency improved significantly.
However, implementing pathology LIS solutions should not be taken lightly. The process requires careful planning, a well-thought-out implementation plan, and continual evaluation to ensure long-term success.
Pre-Planning an Anatomic Pathology LIS Deployment
Whether undertaking a new initiative or deploying software, successful projects share the following characteristics:
Well-Defined Objectives
Project objectives should be more specific than “installing anatomic pathology LIS software.” Actionable project goals articulate why the software is being installed. In an anatomic pathology lab, objectives might set expectations for how the new LIS will streamline specimen tracking and reporting of complex diagnostic data. For GI and derm labs, they might instead focus on improving the efficiency of processing high volumes of biopsies and achieving faster turnaround times. Well-defined objectives not only help determine the metrics used to define success as the project progresses but also instill confidence and reassurance in the team and stakeholders.
Realistic Expectations
Well-written expectations can help determine realistic timelines. For example, expecting lab staff to be proficient in a new software system within thirty days of installation is unrealistic unless the project plan includes adequate training resources and dedicated training times. This is particularly important in specialized labs where staff may need in-depth training on specific modules related to their workflow. Setting realistic expectations ensures everyone is prepared and informed, fostering a sense of readiness and understanding.
Engaged Stakeholders
Once stakeholders are onboard, keeping them engaged requires effective communication. As part of pre-planning, implementation teams should establish when and how staff will get updates to ensure everyone stays engaged and provides necessary feedback during implementation. Engaged stakeholders are not just informed, but they feel involved and integral to the process.
Sufficient Resources
Resources may be financial, operational, or technical. A laboratory’s technical infrastructure must be sufficient to support the pathology laboratory information system, and staff should be available to meet established milestones. For labs focused on image analysis (a common feature of anatomic, GI, and derm labs), sufficient data storage and processing power are critical resources. A lack of adequate resources can delay implementation and hinder progress.
Realistic Timelines
Unreasonable timelines hurt project momentum. As teams miss milestones, staff may perceive a shift in priorities away from anatomic pathology LIS implementation. This perception may manifest in missed meetings or delayed deliverables, creating a snowball effect that prevents project completion.
Comprehensive Risk Assessments
Every project has risk, and failing to manage it can permanently derail success. For example, what is the contingency plan if data quality doesn’t meet integrity standards? Performing data assessment early in the project can help mitigate later impacts. Dermatology labs, for example, should consider risks regarding secure image storage and transmission compliance.
Documented Protocols
A project schedule should account for the time and resources needed to deliver documented protocols once the anatomic pathology LIS is operational. Performing such assessments once the software is already installed increases the risk of potential compliance or regulatory violations and human error.
Implementation Plans for an Anatomic Pathology LIS Project
Project plans should include implementation plans that outline how the anatomic pathology LIS will integrate into the laboratory. It should address the following:
Data Migration Strategies: How will existing data be moved to the new anatomic pathology LIS? Will manual entry be required? How will data verification occur? Consider the challenges of migrating specialized data fields. In an anatomic pathology lab, these might be immunohistochemistry markers.
Parallel System Management: Parallel operations can reduce implementation risk, but how will the two systems be synchronized to ensure that current data is available in both?
Training: Staff training will vary by role, with some requiring competency assessments. When will this training be performed, and how will success be gauged?
Quality Control: What processes will be in place to ensure quality control standards? Will operating protocols need to change? Ensure quality control protocols are tailored to the testing procedures unique to your lab specialization.
Ongoing Support: Once the new system is installed, staff will undoubtedly have questions. How will they get answers? Will there be an escalation procedure?
Update implementation plans as the project progresses to reflect the real-world operations accurately.
Continuous Improvement for Pathology LIS Solutions
Best practices go beyond initial deployment to describe how laboratory processes will continue to improve. Monitoring operations requires identifying key performance indicators (KPIs) and establishing metrics to highlight changes in performance. KPIs in a pathology environment may include:
- Turnaround Time: How long does it take to receive sample results? If times are increasing, what are the causes? Is it related to operational inefficiencies, poor sample quality, or communication breakdowns?
- Use Rate: What equipment is used and how frequently? This information can highlight underused capacities for further growth.
- Specimen Processing Time (By Type): How long does it take to process various specimen types? While processing times that vary by specimen type are standard, there should be consistency within specimen groups. If the deviation is significant, documented protocols, workflows, or training may need updating.
- Error Rate: How often do errors occur? What is the error rate by specimen type or testing protocol?
- Sample Rejection Rate: How many samples are rejected and why? What is the source of the rejected samples? If most rejections come from a few sources, laboratories should review their existing protocols and update originators concerning sample quality.
- Costs: Cost KPIs highlight the profitability of each test and case. Declining profit margins may indicate training gaps, sample handling problems, or operational inefficiencies.
- Customer Satisfaction: Are customer rates rising or falling? For specialized pathology labs, providing easier access to complex test results and greater availability of digital images might improve customer satisfaction.
Continuous improvement is key in pathology. As the field evolves, so must the laboratories. By establishing KPIs during the pre-planning phase and collecting preliminary data during implementation, pathology labs can gather critical data for sustained growth. This continuous improvement process can lead to better patient outcomes, increased efficiency, and improved staff satisfaction.
Psyche Systems’ LIS solutions include systems designed to meet the requirements of anatomic pathology laboratories and their unique challenges as demand for services grows. Contact us to learn how we can help ensure your LIS deployment succeeds.