Sources & methodologyDE
The data behind the savings calculator

Sources & methodology

The savings calculator is deliberately cautious: every figure rests on published studies and specialist literature or on experience from comparable lab projects (so far mostly from German-speaking countries, with international projects being added all the time). What is an assumption is shown as an assumption. Your own figures replace the estimates in the Discovery workshop.

How the calculator works

The calculator looks at routine diagnostics: clinical chemistry and haematology. PCR and microbiology are not included; samples of this kind count as special material.

From everyday figures to the model

The Quick-Check’s opening questions ask about things you can see day to day – the share of samples without a pneumatic tube system, deliveries per day, cases and samples per day, the people at sample reception at peak times. The calculation still uses the model’s documented settings (rates and measured times); each answer is turned directly into the matching setting. For example, 30 sample–order mismatches a day with 3,000 samples is a mismatch rate of 1%, and “100% without a pneumatic tube system” simply means: there is none.

Only the question about people needs an assumption of its own: how much of the time present at peak hours is really manual registration and sorting work (experience value about 18%, adjustable in the Discovery workshop). The model values themselves can still be set directly on every area page in the expert view.

What the certainty levels mean

Every setting carries one of four labels in the calculator’s “i” button. It tells you how reliable the preset value is:

validated
Measured: the value comes from a field measurement or from the figures of a lab project, not from the literature.
plausible
Supported: a published study, a standard or a manufacturer document gives this value or the range it lies in; the source is in the list below.
assumption
Experience value: from comparable lab projects, without a study behind it. It sits at the lower end of what we have observed and is replaced by your figure in the Discovery workshop.
still open
No basis: a placeholder that we show openly instead of guessing it. It only becomes reliable with your figures.

Three savings without a literature value and what they deliberately leave out

For most figures in the calculator there are published studies; they are listed in the sources below. For the following three points there are none. So we treat them as experience values, set them at the lower end of what we have observed and adjust them with your figures in the Discovery workshop – instead of citing a study that measured something else.

Sample–order mismatches: sample without order, order without sample

Assumption: 1% of samples, 8 minutes of manual work per case, 60% of which the automatic matching resolves. All three are at the lower end of what has been reported.

Evidence: No study measures this case; the literature on incomplete requests measures something else (the form, not the matching).

Not counted: the wait for the referrer to call back, and anything already counted as a query or replacement material.

Guided archiving: pull instead of searching

Assumption: An add-on request costs 6 minutes today (lower end of the 5–15 range); with a known position, 1 minute is left.

Evidence: The only published figure (3.5 minutes) is an author’s estimate from a US hospital with an organised archive. In the calculator it is the share that the storage-location hint already covers.

Not counted: the gripper robot from the study (we do not sell it), the minute already saved elsewhere (it is deducted) and archive samples that went missing (not reliably recorded anywhere).

Night and weekend operation without anyone at reception

Assumption: 3 minutes of walking per delivery outside core hours, half of it a real saving; today the sample waits 20 minutes to be registered.

Evidence: There is evidence for the closed reception chain, but not for the walking and waiting times of a specific night shift. They depend on the floor plan.

Not counted: night-shift posts saved (your minimum staffing is your decision) and the sample’s waiting time as money.

What the technical terms mean

The words used on this website and in the calculator, each explained in one sentence, without jargon.

Discovery
The joint meeting after the Quick-Check: about two hours with your team, on site or online, in which we replace the calculator’s estimates with your own figures.
HIS
Hospital information system: the software in which a ward manages its patients and from which it places lab orders.
LIS
Laboratory information system: the software in which the lab manages its orders, samples and results.
NC
Nonconformity: a sample or order where something is not right – a missing label, missing details on the request form or the wrong tube.
One-Touch
The sample is handled only once: recording, sorting and passing it on happen in one go instead of in several separate steps.
Order entry
The step in which a lab order is created, usually before the sample arrives in the lab.
Quick-Check
The short self-test on this website: three figures about your lab, then four areas with three questions each. At the end you see what could be saved per year. No sign-up.
Rip-and-replace
Out with everything old, in with everything new: replacing an existing system completely instead of adding to it step by step.
STAT
An urgent sample, one that is moved to the front of the queue because the result is needed quickly, for example in A&E.
TAT
Turnaround time: on this website the time from the blood draw to the first result, so including transport and sample reception, not only from the moment the sample reaches the lab.
TLA
Total lab automation, the automated line in the lab: analysers connected by a conveyor that pass samples on without anyone handling them.

Sources

60 sources · Last updated: October 2026