The impact of online management systems: a qualitative assessment of staff perception at a clinical research laboratory

Abstract

Good Clinical Laboratory Practices (GCLP) increase the quality and traceability of results in clinical research. However, high turnover of staff, insufficient resources, and lack of training in lab management may limit its implementation at Academic Health Centers (AHCs). This work aimed to qualitatively assess the staff perception of the implementation of a freeware Online Management System (OMS) on the workflow of an academic clinical research laboratory. A free online OMS (Quartzy, Quartzy Inc., USA) was selected and implemented from 2012-2016. After training interventions, a qualitative analysis was performed for the staff attitude towards the implementation, including a structured questionnaire (30 participants) and focus group assessments (16 participants). Indicators of management performance were also compared before and after the implementation. The results indicate that lab members perceive improvement in organization, communication, and commitment of staff, who reported the system as user-friendly and a facilitator for the autonomy of group members. On the other hand, there is a recognition of the need for constant training and engagement at the management level. These findings suggest that full-scope OMS may represent useful tools to assist in staff engagement in compliance with GCLP at AHC laboratories.

Digital Management Systems in Academic Health Sciences Laboratories: A Scoping Review

“…Other all-purpose management systems such as Labguru have most of these functions on a specific equipment module. That was also the case of the freely available (for individual researchers) Quartzy until 2016, as reported by Timóteo et al [ 6 ]. This study described how the implementation of the software optimized the shared use of equipment on a multiuser clinical research unit and the advantages of allowing equipment scheduling, check-in, and check-out remotely, even using mobile phones.…”

“…In this sense, the approach proposed by Timoteo et al [ 6 ] could be applied to the present sources of data to chart the main topics of management affected by these programs and systems related to good practice guidelines. The chart presented in Figure 2 shows how the types of management supported by the software in academic laboratories are related to several items from Section II of the OECD GLP Principles [ 3 ].…”

“…To adequately assess the impact of these electronic management systems, different methodological approaches are available, such as pre/post-tests evaluating quantitative indicators of performance and provision of services. However, as Timoteo et al [ 6 ] discussed, the complex nature of the provided services of multiuser, academic research facilities may impair the obtention of feedback through quantitative indicators. In this sense, the perception and attitudes of staff towards the management system may contribute to understanding its impact on the workflow and the search for quality at academic clinical research laboratories, as well as provide data for the development or improvement of actions and strategies toward quality and compliance [ 31 , 32 , 33 ].…”

“…However, academic laboratories experience several critical barriers to developing and implementing a GLP-compliant infrastructure [ 5 ]. These limitations include poor training on management, lack of funding for compliance costs, and high staff turnover due to a dependence on students as temporary personnel [ 6 ]. Therefore, laboratory managers at academic centers should explore tools that facilitate supervision and identify critical steps in the laboratory workflow.…”

“…Laboratory information management systems (LIMS) offer databases and automation [ 7 ] that allow experimental data tracking and storage [ 8 ]. Other software and digital services that fall outside of the original LIMS classification provide a broader offer of solutions to laboratory management [ 6 , 9 ], coping with other aspects of quality assurance related to communication, staff, multiuser equipment schedule and maintenance, standard procedures, and inventory control, which are fundamental in the full spectrum of a laboratory’s workflow [ 10 , 11 ].…”