English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aim: In the era of automation, the modalities available for analysis of samples for a clinical chemistry laboratory include both wet chemistry and dry chemistry analyzers. Wet chemistry systems are routinely used in small to large clinical chemistry laboratories whereas dry chemistry analyzers are restricted to large laboratories. Cost analysis is a system that is used for providing financial information to make financial projections. Aim of the study was to compare the cost analysis of wet chemistry and a dry chemistry analyzer. Materials and methods: Apart from the cost of the basic kits, a large number of controls, calibrators, consumables, and fluids are procured to run the various tests in the laboratories. A cost analysis of the wet chemistry analyzer and the dry chemistry analyzer available with us was performed to compare both the systems. Results: The cost per test (CPT) of the parameters on the wet chemistry analyzer was lower as compared to the dry chemistry analyzer. On factoring the cost of controls, calibrators, tubings, accessories and other consumables for both the systems, a figure of ` 8.91 as the cost of consumables per test for the wet chemistry analyzers and ` 0.40 for the dry chemistry analyzer was reached. On the further calculation of the cost per reproducible test (CPRT), it was seen that the wet chemistry analyzer had CPRT of ` 26.43 and the dry chemistry analyzer had `23.5. Conclusion: The results point towards the dry chemistry analyzer as being cheaper to a wet chemistry analyzer if the workload of samples being analyzed on them is high. Clinical importance: A thorough cost analysis is imperative to be done for any clinical chemistry laboratory to determine the cost-effectiveness of a system so that an informed decision can be made to incorporate new methods if required.

Cost Analysis in the Clinical Chemistry Laboratory in the Era of Automation: Our Experience