The majority of clinical decisions are based on laboratory and health test data, yet the methods and infrastructure for collecting such data severely limit the quality and utility of the data itself. Almost all errors in laboratory testing are associated with human or pre-analytic processing errors, and the testing process can take days to weeks to complete. Often times by the time a practicing physician gets the data to effectively treat a patient or determine the most appropriate intervention, he or she has generally already been forced to treat a patient empirically or prophylactically as the data was not available at the time of the visit or patient triage. Earlier access to higher quality testing information at the time of patient triage enables earlier interventions and better management of disease progression to improve outcomes and lower the cost of care.
Existing systems and methods for clinical testing suffer major drawbacks from the perspectives of patients, medical care professionals, taxpayers, and insurance companies. Today, consumers can undergo certain specialized tests at clinics or other specialized locations. If a test is to be conducted and the result of which is to be eventually relied on by a doctor, physical samples are transported to a location which performs the test on the samples. For example, these samples may comprise blood from a venous draw and are typically collected from a subject at the specialized locations. Accessibility of these locations and the venipuncture process in and of itself is a major barrier in compliance and frequency of testing. Availability for visiting a blood collection site, the fear of needles—especially in children and elderly persons who, for example, often have rolling veins, and the difficulty associated with drawing large amounts of blood drives people away from getting tested even when it is needed. Thus, the conventional sampling and testing approach is cumbersome and requires a significant amount of time to provide test results. Such methods are not only hampered by scheduling difficulties and/or limited accessibility to collection sites for subjects to provide physical samples but also by the batch processing of samples in centralized laboratories and the associated turn around time in running laboratory tests. As a result, the overall turn around time involved in getting to the collection site, acquiring the sample, transporting the sample, testing the sample and reporting and delivering results becomes prohibitive and severely limits the timely provision of the most informed care from a medical professional. This often results in treatment of symptoms as opposed to underlying disease conditions or mechanisms of disease progression.
In addition, traditional techniques are problematic for certain diagnoses. Some tests may be critically time sensitive, but take days or weeks to complete. Over such a time, a disease can progress past the point of treatment. In some instances, follow-up tests are required after initial results, which take additional time as the patient has to return to the specialized locations. This impairs a medical professional's ability to provide effective care. Furthermore, conducting tests at only limited locations and/or infrequently reduces the likelihood that a patient's status can be regularly monitored or that the patient will be able to provide the samples quickly or as frequently as needed. For certain diagnoses or conditions, these deficiencies inevitably cause inadequate medical responses to changing and deteriorating physiological conditions. Traditional systems and methods also affect the integrity and quality of a clinical test due to degradation of a sample that often occurs while transporting such sample from the site of collection to the place where analysis of the sample is performed. For example, analytes decay at a certain rate, and the time delay for analysis can result in loss of sample integrity. Different laboratories also work with different quality standards which can result in varying degrees of error. Additionally, preparation and analysis of samples by hand permits upfront human error to occur at various sample collection sites and laboratories. These and other drawbacks inherent in the conventional setup make it difficult to perform longitudinal analyses, especially for chronic disease management, with high quality and reliability
Furthermore, such conventional analytical techniques are often not cost effective. Excessive time lags in obtaining test results lead to delays in diagnoses and treatments that can have a deleterious effect on a patient's health; as a disease progresses further, the patient then needs additional treatment and too often ends up unexpectedly seeing some form of hospitalization. Payers, such as health insurance companies and taxpayers contributing to governmental health programs, end up paying more to treat problems that could have been averted with more accessible and faster clinical test results.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds