A-273 Comparative Analysis of Workflow Efficiency and Safety in Enteric Bacterial Pathogen Detection Methods

Abstract Background This study compares key performance indicators (KPIs) of various nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) and traditional culture-based methodologies for identifying enteric bacterial pathogens. Traditional culture-based methods lack sensitivity and specificity, leading to diagnostic inaccuracies and longer turnaround times. Additionally, some NAATs require extensive handling of infectious stool specimens, posing safety risks. The BD COR™ system, including the Enteric Bacterial Pathogen and Enteric Bacterial Plus panels, offers an automated, high-throughput solution with minimal user interaction, potentially enhancing efficiency and safety in clinical laboratories. Methods This study compares key performance indicators (KPIs) across five NAATs: BD COR™ Enteric Bacterial Pathogen Panel (COR EBP), BD COR™ Enteric Pathogen Plus Panel (COR EBP Plus), BioFire® Filmarray® Gastrointestinal Panel (BioFire), Luminex Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel (Luminex GPP), and BioCode® Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel (BioCode), as well as traditional culture-based methods. Observations were made at three laboratories, focusing on hands-on time (HOT), walk-away time (WAT), turn-around time (TAT), touches, and biohazardous material touches (BMT). Data were averaged and projected for a single run of each platform (Table 1) as well as projected for a standardized run of 24 samples. Results The BioFire system had a HOT at 3.6 minutes and a WAT of 70.0 minutes per sample. The COR EBP systems varied significantly depending on the sample type, with HOT ranging from 5.6 to 63.7 minutes and WAT consistently at 371.0 minutes for 72 samples. The BD COR EBP Plus systems showed HOT from 3.1 to 30.1 minutes and WAT at 327.0 minutes for 36 samples. The Luminex GPP system had the longest HOT at 376.1 minutes and WAT at 454.0 minutes for 96 samples. The BioCode system had a HOT of 291.6 minutes and a WAT of 340.1 minutes for 96 samples. Traditional culture has a HOT of 8.1 minutes and WAT of 3900.1 minutes per sample. For a standardized run of 24 samples, BD COR exhibited the lowest amount of HOT, regardless of assay and sample type. Conclusion BioFire and COR EBP with stools in transport media are the most efficient systems, with the shortest Hands-On Time (HOT) and a high WAT. The overall workload for enterics testing can vary and, therefore, selecting the best diagnostic system should balance efficiency and safety with the total processing demands. For systems such as BD COR these KPIs can be improved in the context of automated, high-throughput testing.