Analysis of the costs for the laboratory of flow cytometry screening of urine samples before culture.

Urine culture samples comprise a large proportion of the workload in clinical microbiology laboratories, and most of the urine samples show no growth or insignificant growth. A flow cytometry-based analyzer (Sysmex Corporation, Japan) has been used to screen out negative urine samples prior to culture in the Päijät-Häme district. We applied decision analytic modelling to analyze, from a laboratory perspective, the economic feasibility of the screening method as compared to culture only (conventional method) for diagnosis of urinary tract infection. Our model suggests that the least costly analytical strategy is the conventional method. The incremental cost of screening is €0.29/sample. Although laboratory costs are higher, considerable savings on workload can be achieved. Furthermore, screening has numerous benefits on the treatment process of a patient that well warrant the use of the screening method. We conclude that the incremental cost of screening the samples is worth the expense.

PCR identification of bacteria in blood culture does not fit the daily workflow of a routine microbiology laboratory.

We have evaluated the GenoType blood culture assay (Hain Lifescience, Nehren, Germany) for the identification of bacteria in 233 positive blood cultures and assessed its suitability in the workflow of a routine microbiology laboratory. In 68/233 (29.2%) samples, the culture result could not be confirmed by the GenoType assay due to a lack of primers in the test, multiple organisms in the sample, or inconsistency with respect to the identification by culture. Although the GenoType blood culture assay gives satisfactory results for bacteria for which primers are available, there are difficulties in applying the test in the routine microbiology laboratory.