000			03100nam a22003137a 4500
001			T002889
003			PILC
005			20241030134547.0
008			241030b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_beng _cFEU-NRMF MEDICAL LIBRARY _drda
050			_aMT 2024 0029 c.1
100	1		_aAbad, Terri Lynne B., _eauthor
245	0	1	_aComparative analytical turnaround time between manual and semi-automated methods for urine sediment analysis, _b[author]: Abad, Terri Lynne B., Consulta, Mark Anthony D.C, Funcion, Jerricho G., Pena, Julien Angela A., Torrano, Angelica Marie T.
260			_aQuezon City,Philippines; _bFEU-NRMF Dr. Nicanor Reyes Medical Foundation Institute of Medicine, _c2024
300			_a105pages _c28cm
336			_2rdacontent _atext
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume
504			_aIncludes Appendix
520			_aABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Assessing the Turnaround Time (TAT) in urine sediment analysis plays a critical role in speeding up clinical laboratory results availability thus affording clinicians faster diagnosis especially at the emergency department. This study involves a comparative analysis of the TAT for both manual and automated methods, each playing a distinct role in delivering accurate and timely results. METHOD: This study employs a cross-sectional comparative experimental design to assess the turnaround times in manual and automated urinalysis processes. Participants, within the age bracket of 18 to 60 years old, including medical technologists, will be recruited from a Tertiary Private Hospital. RESULT: The manual method group exhibited a mean analytical time of 1243 seconds (SD = 1194) and a standard error of 178. This variability may be attributed to a variety of factors. The automated method group's mean analytical time was 63.4 seconds (SD = 8.06), with a standard error of 1.20. The automated group's low standard deviation implies that automation produces more consistent results. CONCLUSION: Automated methods provide a substantial improvement in turnaround time and consistency compared to manual processes. Participants noted the ease of categorization and rapid results obtained through automated systems, with one participant stating that while manual analysis takes approximately 20-25 minutes per sample, automated systems can deliver results in as little as five minutes. This efficiency is critical for maintaining high standards in clinical laboratories, as inaccuracies in urine analysis can lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment. Keywords: automated method, comparative experimental design, manual method, turnaround time
521			_abri'oot
700			_aAbad, Terri Lynne B., _eauthor
700			_aConsulta, Mark Anthony D.C _eauthor
700			_aFuncion, Jerricho G., _eauthor
700			_aPena, Julien Angela A., _eauthor
700			_aTorrano, Angelica Marie T. _eauthor
856			_21 _30 _qpdf _uhttps://library.feu-nrmf.ph/cgi-bin/koha/opac-retrieve-file.pl?id=eeb4afddcb5fcaf871ec580044c748d7 _yClick here for FULL TEXT _1ALL
942			_2lcc _cTH
999			_c13168 _d13168