IT in the Lab: Cloudy solutions -- Part 1

Part 1 of a two-part article

By Trevor De Silva
Scimcom

Our Regulatory Compliance Manager continually needs to remind us all of the differences between QC and QA, but my question is, why do laboratory personnel repeatedly fail to recognize the difference between information systems (IS) and information technology (IT)?

With their ubiquitous PCs, analytical instruments, and networks, laboratories today are brimming with IT, but surely, the underlying information systems that exist are equally significant.

While laboratory managers are usually capable of identifying their information-related problems, understanding the contributory causes, identifying and clarifying the possible solutions that exist to manage and share the vast amounts of data that their laboratories generate requires experience and a different viewpoint.

Consider any generic laboratory and the chances are that you could divide the work process into six categories.

• sample receipt
  
• sample analysis
  
• analytical result entry/review
  
• result reporting
  
• general management

I accept that these functions will differ in detail for each type of laboratory, but there is a surprisingly high level of commonality of operation and even though the language may vary, we can look at any category and analyze the impact of IT and the problems that it brings.

To highlight my point, reflect on something as simple as a change to a client's contact address. Imagine that a change of address notification accompanies a batch of samples into sample receipt. What information systems need to be updated? I can, for example, think of at least three in our organization (LIMS, accounts, marketing).

Which is the master system? Which system needs to be changed first? What are the possibilities and consequences of a mismatched address? Clearly, IT in the laboratory has been a boon but without taking a step back and looking at the overlapping Information systems, problems will arise.

Whenever we invest in IT we should be asking ourselves: what we are going to do with the data that we generate and what information will we need to extract from it? Sample analysis is an easy place to start digging, and in many laboratories, you do not have to dig too far. We all dream of the laboratory where all instruments utilize identical data systems but of course, in reality laboratories contain different types of instrument from different vendors running different data systems.

I know there are constraints, but managers of instrument laboratories who upgrade their instruments to a new data system—only to find that suddenly all the laboratory personnel cannot process any data—should be taken to task and reminded of the bigger picture. I'm not suggesting that the tail should wag the dog, since analytical purchases should be justified on the laboratory's needs. But if more thought is given to a company's IS needs, then potential problems can be identified much earlier and solutions are clearer.

A comparable problem existed at a laboratory I visited earlier this year. Through normal growth, they reached the stage where a laboratory supervisor was responsible for 11 instruments from five vendors, covering six different techniques (GCMS, LCMS, HPLC, NMR, AA, and SEM) and ranging from 6 months to 6 years in age. My client was concerned about today, specifically how they could possibly manage to continue to train staff in all systems and equally about the storage and retrieval archive problems the future would bring.

Surprisingly, the laboratory in question had a great deal of success with their goals and that is partly down to the efforts in standardizing data formats. I know that there is still a long way to go, but as consumers, we should recognize and applaud the progress, because the benefits are being realized.

Despite the success story outlined, many of the problems should have been avoided. It disappoints me that so few companies can actually produce an IS strategy document. Whenever I visit a laboratory as a consultant I ask for a copy of the IS strategy, but to date only 10% of clients have been able to produce one!

Is this the route of the problem? I think it is.

End of Part 1.

For more information: Trevor De Silva, Scimcon, Newmarket Rd., Fordham, Cambridgeshire CB7 5WW, United Kingdom. Tel: +44-1638-720204. Fax: +44-1638-724206. Email: tdesilva@scimcon.com.