United Airlines creates pilot program for on-site rapid PCR tests, as other airlines facilitate at-home specimen collection for rapid coronavirus testing
Four US airlines attempting to recover lost business due to the COVID-19 pandemic are partnering with developers of rapid RT-PCR (reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) tests to facilitate testing of passengers either at airports before they board their flights, at drive-through testing sites, or at-home in advance of scheduled travel.
This would be a great opportunity for clinical laboratories to gain business, but few details are known about how these airlines are selecting providers for the COVID-19 tests that will be part of their programs.
The deals come amid calls from the International Air Transport Association (IATA) “for the development and deployment of rapid, accurate, affordable, easy-to-operate, scalable and systematic COVID-19 testing for all passengers before departure as an alternative to quarantine measures” in many countries, states an IATA press release.
“The key to restoring the freedom of mobility across borders is systematic COVID-19 testing of all travelers before departure,” said Alexandre de Juniac, IATA Director General and CEO, in the IATA press release. “This will give governments the confidence to open their borders without complicated risk models that see constant changes in the rules imposed on travel.”
From a clinical laboratory testing perspective, the requirement for passengers to be tested prior to travel may contribute to two changes in the lab testing marketplace:
Consumers may become accustomed to buying home collection kits for COVID-19 and sending specimens to clinical laboratories. This could have the added benefit of helping consumers become comfortable doing this for other diagnostic tests as well.
Pursuit of profit from manufacturing COVID-19 tests that utilize consumer-collected specimens may increase competition in this market and would likely increase the number of at-home specimen collection products that are easier and more convenient to use.
US carriers offering the COVID-19 tests include United Airlines, American Airlines, Hawaiian Airlines, and JetBlue.
United Airlines
United is providing on-site testing through pilot programs at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) and Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR). At SFO, passengers are tested before taking flights to Hawaii. At EWR, they are tested prior to boarding a thrice-weekly flight to London Heathrow.
“We believe the ability to provide fast, same-day COVID-19 testing will play a vital role in safely reopening travel around the world and navigating quarantines and travel restrictions, particularly to key international destinations like London,” said Toby Enqvist, United’s Chief Customer Officer, in a press release.
United began offering testing at SFO on Oct. 15. According to “COVID-19 Testing for United Travelers,” the San Francisco to Hawaii passengers have two options:
A $105 drive-through test administered two or three days prior to flights by Color, a San Francisco Bay area health technology company.
The airline says a negative test ensures that travelers can bypass Hawaii’s mandatory quarantine requirements in Lihue, Maui, and Honolulu. For the Newark-to-London flights, United plans to run a pilot rapid testing program from Nov. 16 to Dec. 11. for passengers boarding Flight 14, departing at 7:15 p.m. Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. Premise Health will administer the testing, which will be free to passengers. Those who choose not to be tested will be placed on other flights.
A United Airlines flight attendant (above) receives an RT-PCR test for COVID-19 prior to boarding. If the flying public embraces preflight coronavirus testing, including at-home specimen collection kits, clinical laboratories may see a spike in requests for test processing. (Photo copyright: The Washington Post.)
American Airlines
American is offering COVID-19 testing for passengers scheduled on flights to Hawaii, Latin America, and the Caribbean, according to a press release. For the most part, these are at-home specimen collection RT-PCR tests provided by healthcare testing services company PrivaPath Diagnostics, Inc. (d.b.a., LetsGetChecked). Customers receive their results within 24 to 72 hours after the lab receives the samples.
As with the United flights to Hawaii, the testing program allows passengers to bypass quarantine requirements at their destinations. Customers pay $119 for the LetsGetChecked at-home specimen-collection kit and subsequent RT-PCR testing.
“Our initial preflight testing has performed remarkably well, including terrific customer feedback about the ease and availability of testing options,” American Airlines President Robert Isom said in the press release.
Hawaiian Airlines and JetBlue
In separate press releases, Hawaiian Airlines and JetBlue announced partnerships with Vault Health to offer at-home saliva tests to passengers. After receiving the at-home specimen collection kit, customers can connect through Zoom video conferencing with a Vault Health supervisor who ensures the sample is collected properly.
Hawaiian Airlines also offers drive-through testing at SFO and Los Angeles International Airport through a partnership with Worksite Labs. Passengers pay $90 to receive test results within 36 hours or $150 for express service on the day of travel. Worksite uses a Droplet Digital PCR shallow nasal swab test. The airline says it plans to expand this to other airports.
The Vault Health and Worksite Labs tests meet the state’s guidelines for exemption from the 14-day quarantine requirement, the airlines say.
Impact on Medical Laboratories
Airlines offering COVID-19 testing to their passengers may trigger both an opportunity and a change in the clinical laboratory testing marketplace. First, there is a business opportunity for labs to provide rapid molecular SARS-COV-2 tests to airlines.
Second, if consumers begin using at-home specimen collection kits in greater numbers as part of their air travel requirements, might this make them more comfortable doing self-collection for other types of clinical laboratory tests? A shift in consumer willingness to collect their own medical laboratory specimens—accompanied by ongoing innovations in diagnostic technologies, may eventually reduce the need for medical labs to operate extensive networks of patient service centers.
Of course, such a scenario is years away. But airline COVID-19 testing programs are just one of the progressive steps that can help make that possibility into a reality.
Clinical laboratory managers and pathology practice administrators should consider how these trends may affect their business and patients when planning for the future.
The McKinsey graphic above illustrates the “six trends that are likely to shape post-COVID-19 healthcare.” Clinical laboratories that support health networks struggling with any of these challenges should take steps to prepare for anticipated changes to healthcare delivery. (Graphic copyright: McKinsey and Company.)
1: Healthcare Reform
McKinsey identified three areas where the coronavirus pandemic may impact healthcare reform:
“COVID-19-era waivers that could become permanent.
“Actions that may be taken to strengthen the healthcare system to deal with pandemics.
“Reforms to address the COVID-19-induced crisis.”
McKinsey reports that “the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has introduced more than 190 waivers since the beginning of March 2020.” These waivers can affect all aspects of healthcare, from clinical practice to reimbursement. Some of them, according to McKinsey, are “only relevant during the crisis (for example, the waiver of intensive care unit death reporting). A retrospective assessment of others (for example, expansion of telehealth access) could reveal beneficial innovation worth preserving.”
Several areas that McKinsey says are clearly ripe for reform include improving the resiliency of the healthcare system and the way the system is funded.
Public sector budgets are generally kept strictly separate, each with its own rules and policies that dictate operations. But in his article, “After COVID-19—Thinking Differently About Running the Health Care System,” published in JAMA Health Network, Stuart M. Butler, PhD, Senior Fellow in Economic Studies at the Brookings Institution, wrote, “The intensity of the COVID-19 pandemic … is forcing jurisdictions all across the country to find ways to be nimble so that multiple agencies can work together.”
Thus, McKinsey recommends, “Given the substantial shifts in relative market positioning among industry players that prior reforms have created, leaders would do well to plan ahead now.”
2: Better Access to Healthcare Services
Some people who develop COVID-19 are at far greater risk of hospitalization and death than others, including those who have:
Chronic health conditions, including obesity.
Mental and behavioral health challenges, such as substance abuse.
Unmet social needs, such as food or housing insecurity.
Poor access to healthcare.
McKinsey wrote that these “intersecting health and social conditions,” combined with certain races that have higher risk for severe complications, including Black, Indian, and Hispanic/Latino Americans, “correlated with poorer health outcomes.”
Value-based healthcare, telehealth, and greater attention to the social determinants of health may help address some of these issues, McKinsey notes, but the pandemic has shined a spotlight on how lack of care increases risk for certain populations during a public health crisis.
3: Era of Exponential Improvement Unleashed
Some of the trends that appear to be accelerating as a result of the pandemic are good news. McKinsey cites several benefits, including:
Improved understanding of patients.
Delivery of more convenient and individualized care.
$350-$410 billion in annual revenue by 2025.
Through telehealth and other types of virtual care enabled by digital technology, “intuitive healthcare ecosystems” may arise and offer a more integrated experience for patients and their caregivers, McKinsey notes.
“While the pace of change in healthcare has lagged other industries in the past, potential for rapid improvement may accelerate due to COVID-19. An example is the exponential uptake of digitally enabled, virtual care,” McKinsey wrote. “Our analysis … showed that health systems, primary care, and behavioral health practices are reporting increases of more than 50–175 times in telehealth visits, and the potential market size for virtual care could reach around $250 billion.”
The graphic above is taken from the McKinsey and Co. report, which noted, “Proliferation of digitally enabled, virtual care could further contribute to the rise of personalized and intuitive healthcare ecosystems [that] have the potential to deliver an integrated experience to consumers, enhance productivity of providers, engage both formal and informal caregivers, and improve outcomes while lowering cost.” (Graphic copyright: McKinsey and Company.)
4: The Big Squeeze
The pandemic has caused an enormous outflow of cash from the healthcare system, and some experts don’t expect an injection of funding until 2022. “This outflow is expected to be primarily driven by coverage shifts out of employer-sponsored insurance and possible coverage reductions by employers as well as Medicaid rate pressures from states,” McKinsey states.
“We estimate that COVID-19 could depress healthcare industry earnings by between $35 billion and $75 billion compared with baseline expectations,” McKinsey predicted, adding, “Select high-growth segments will remain attractive (for example, virtual care, home health, software and platforms, specialty pharmacy) and will disproportionally drive growth. These high-growth areas are expected to increase more than 10% over the next five years, while other segments may stagnate or decline altogether.”
5: Fragmented, Integrated, Consolidated Care Delivery
McKinsey says, “The shift of care out of hospitals is not new but has been accelerated by COVID-19.” Rather than the hospital being the center of care delivery, patients are increasingly choosing to receive care at a range of sites across many healthcare ecosystems that are connected digitally and through analytics.
Early in the course of the pandemic, visits to ambulatory care facilities dropped nearly 60% by early April. But by mid-May, those visits were beginning to rebound.
In, “The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Outpatient Visits: A Rebound Emerges,” the Commonwealth Fund reported that “the relative decline in visits remains largest among surgical and procedural specialties and pediatrics” but is “smaller in other specialties, such as adult primary care and behavioral health.”
The McKinsey graphic above shows how “virtual care and outpatient options show more potential revenue growth through 2022.” Clinical laboratories that support those healthcare settings, especially ambulatory surgery, behavioral health, and retail clinics, should experience similar growth. (Graphic copyright: McKinsey and Company.)
6: Adoption of Next-Generation Managed Care Is Accelerating
How will COVID-19 affect the managed care industry? McKinsey says the “next generation” of managed care might use Medicare Advantage as a model.
“Payers pursuing the next generation of managed care model (through deep integration with care delivery) demonstrate better financial performance, capturing an additional 50 basis points of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization above expectation,” McKinsey noted, adding, “Employers and payers could consider fundamentally rethinking how employer-sponsored health coverage is structured. Learning from Medicare Advantage could provide inspiration for such a reimagination.”
What Should Clinical Laboratory Managers Do?
The McKinsey article concludes by stating, “While the challenges are numerous, leaders who seize the mindset that “disruptive change provides an opportunity to separate yourself from the pack” will build organizations meaningfully stronger than the ones they ran going into the crisis.”
The McKinsey article authors recommend that healthcare organizations take several proactive steps, including:
Launch a plan-ahead team.
Question your role and your future business model.
Prepare to transform your business.
Reimagine your organization to make faster decisions.
Take action to drive health equity.
Though the McKinsey and Company article covered healthcare in general, many of the authors’ observations and recommendations can apply to clinical laboratories and pathology groups as well and may be valuable in future planning.
Sophisticated cyberattacks have already hit hospitals and healthcare networks in Oregon, California, New York, Vermont, and other states
Attention medical laboratory managers and pathology group administrators: It’s time to ramp up your cyberdefenses. The FBI, the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued a joint advisory (AA20-302A) warning US hospitals, clinical laboratories, and other healthcare providers to prepare for impending ransomware attacks, in which cybercriminals use malware, known as ransomware, to encrypt files on victims’ computers and demand payment to restore access.
The joint advisory, titled, “Ransomware Activity Targeting the Healthcare and Public Health Sector,” states, “CISA, FBI, and HHS have credible information of an increased and imminent cybercrime threat to US hospitals and healthcare providers.” It includes technical details about the threat—which uses a type of ransomware known as Ryuk—and suggests best practices for preventing and handling attacks.
In his KrebsOnSecurity blog post, titled, “FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent, Credible Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals,” former Washington Post reporter, Brian Krebs, wrote, “On Monday, Oct. 26, KrebsOnSecurity began following up on a tip from a reliable source that an aggressive Russian cybercriminal gang known for deploying ransomware was preparing to disrupt information technology systems at hundreds of hospitals, clinics, and medical care facilities across the United States. Today, officials from the FBI and the US Department of Homeland Security hastily assembled a conference call with healthcare industry executives warning about an ‘imminent cybercrime threat to US hospitals and healthcare providers.’”
Krebs went on to reported that the threat is linked to a notorious cybercriminal gang known as UNC1878, which planned to launch the attacks against 400 healthcare facilities.
Clinical Labs, Pathology Groups at Risk Because of the Patient Data They Keep
Hackers initially gain access to organizations’ computer systems through phishing campaigns, in which users receive emails “that contain either links to malicious websites that host the malware or attachments with the malware,” the advisory states. Krebs noted that the attacks are “often unique to each victim, including everything from the Microsoft Windows executable files that get dropped on the infected hosts to the so-called ‘command and control’ servers used to transmit data between and among compromised systems.”
Charles Carmakal, SVP and Chief Technology Officer of cybersecurity firm Mandiant told Reuters, “UNC1878 is one of the most brazen, heartless, and disruptive threat actors I’ve observed over my career,” adding, “Multiple hospitals have already been significantly impacted by Ryuk ransomware and their networks have been taken offline.”
John Riggi (above), senior cybersecurity adviser to the American Hospital Association (AHA), told the AP, “We are most concerned with ransomware attacks which have the potential to disrupt patient care operations and risk patient safety. We believe any cyberattack against any hospital or health system is a threat-to-life crime and should be responded to and pursued as such by the government.” Hospital-based medical laboratories and independent clinical laboratories that interface with hospital networks should be assess their vulnerability to cyberattacks and take appropriate steps to protect their patients’ data. (Photo copyright: American Hospital Association.)
Multiple Healthcare Provider Networks Under Attack
Hospitals in Oregon, California, and New York have already been hit by the attacks, Reuters reported. “We can still watch vitals and getting imaging done, but all results are being communicated via paper only,” a doctor at one facility told Reuters, which reported that “staff could see historic records but not update those files.”
Some of the hospitals that have reportedly experienced cyberattacks include:
In October, the Associated Press (AP) reported that a recent cyberattack disrupted computer systems at six hospitals in the University of Vermont (UVM) Health Network. The FBI would not comment on whether that attack involved ransomware, however, it forced the UVM Medical Center to shut down its computer system and reschedule elective procedures.
Threat intelligence analyst Allan Liska of US cybersecurity firm Recorded Future told Reuters, “This appears to have been a coordinated attack designed to disrupt hospitals specifically all around the country.”
He added, “While multiple ransomware attacks against healthcare providers each week have been commonplace, this is the first time we have seen six hospitals targeted in the same day by the same ransomware actor.”
An earlier ransomware attack in September targeted 250 healthcare facilities operated by Universal Health Services Inc. (UHS). A clinician at one facility reported “a high-anxiety scramble” where “medical staff could not easily see clinical laboratory results, imaging scans, medication lists, and other critical pieces of information doctors rely on to make decisions,” AP reported.
Outside of the US, a similar ransomware attack in October at a hospital in Düsseldorf, Germany, prompted a homicide investigation by German authorities after the death of a patient being transferred to another facility was linked to the attack, the BBC reported.
CISA, FBI, HHS, Advise Against Paying Ransoms
To deal with the ransomware attacks, CISA, FBI, and HHS advise against paying ransoms. “Payment does not guarantee files will be recovered,” the advisory states. “It may also embolden adversaries to target additional organizations, encourage other criminal actors to engage in the distribution of ransomware, and/or fund illicit activities.” The federal agencies advise organizations to take preventive measures and adopt plans for coping with attacks.
The advisory suggests:
Training programs for employees, including raising awareness about ransomware and phishing scams. Organizations should “ensure that employees know who to contact when they see suspicious activity or when they believe they have been a victim of a cyberattack.”
Regular backups of data and software. These should be “maintained offline or in separated networks as many ransomware variants attempt to find and delete any accessible backups.” Personnel should also test the backups.
Continuity plans in case information systems are not accessible. For example, organizations should maintain “hard copies of digital information that would be required for critical patient healthcare.”
“Without planning, provision, and implementation of continuity principles, organizations may be unable to continue operations,” the advisory states. “Evaluating continuity and capability will help identify continuity gaps. Through identifying and addressing these gaps, organizations can establish a viable continuity program that will help keep them functioning during cyberattacks or other emergencies.”
Dark Daily Publisher and Editor-in-Chief, Robert Michel, suggests that clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups should have their cyberdefenses assessed by security experts. “This is particularly true because the technologies and methods used by hackers change rapidly,” he said, “and if their laboratory information systems have not been assessed in the past year, then this proactive assessment could be the best insurance against an expensive ransomware attack a lab can purchase.”
Breakthrough assay a ‘tenfold improvement over any prior assay for TERT mutations in the blood for brain tumors,’ MGH says in an affirmation of a diagnostic technology clinical labs might soon use
In recent years, investors have poured tens of millions of dollars into companies that promised to create non-invasive cancer tests which use liquid biopsy technology. Medical laboratory scientists even watched some of these companies hype their particular liquid biopsy tests before clinical studies generated data demonstrating that these tests produced accurate, reliable, and reproducible results.
For diagnosing cancer, a liquid biopsy test typically uses a blood sample with the goal of finding and identifying circulating tumor cells. Harvard Medical School researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) believe they have developed just such a blood test. Their assay utilizes an enhanced form of liquid biopsy to detect and monitor one of the more prevalent types of brain tumor in adults—a glioma—and, according to a Harvard news release, can detect the presence of glioma at a significantly higher “overall sensitivity” than other similar liquid-biopsy tests.
Gliomas start in glia cells contained in the brain or spine. They account for about 30% of all brain and central nervous system tumors and 80% of all malignant brain tumors.
During their study, MGH researchers compared blood samples and tumor biopsy tissues from patients diagnosed with a glioma. They discovered that an assay they developed—a droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) blood test—could detect and monitor two types of telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) promoter gene mutations—C228T and C250T. These two gene mutations promote cancer growth and are present in more than 60% of all gliomas. The mutations are also present in 80% of all high-grade gliomas, which are the most aggressive and life-threatening types of the cancer.
In the press release, instructor in Neurosurgery at MGH and one of the study’s authors, Leonora Balaj, PhD, said, “By ‘supercharging’ our ddPCR assay with novel technical improvements, we showed for the first time that the most prevalent mutation in malignant gliomas can be detected in blood, opening a new landscape for detection and monitoring of the tumors.”
Bob Carter, MD, PhD (above), is neurosurgical oncologist and Chief of Neurosurgery at MGH, a Professor of Neurosurgery at Harvard Medical School, and one of the study’s authors. In the MGH press release he said, “We envision the future integration of tests like this one into the clinical care of our patients with brain tumors. For example, if a patient has a suspected mass on MRI scanning, we can take a blood sample before the surgery and assess the presence of the tumor signature in the blood and then use this signature as a baseline to monitor as the patient later receives treatment, both to gauge response to the treatment and gain early insight into any potential recurrence.” What Carter describes is precision medicine and could open new diagnostic opportunities for anatomic pathology groups and clinical laboratories. (Photo copyright: Massachusetts General Hospital.)
MGH’s Ten-Fold Improvement over Previous ddPCR Assays
A liquid biopsy is the sampling and analysis of non-solid tissue in the body—primarily blood. MGH’s liquid-biopsy method detects cancer by examining fragments of tumor DNA circulating in the bloodstream. Since the technique is mostly non-invasive, tests can be performed more frequently to track tumors and mutations and monitor treatment progression. Prior to this new method, brain tumors had been difficult to detect using liquid biopsies.
“Liquid biopsy is particularly challenging in brain tumors because mutant DNA is shed into the bloodstream at a much lower level than any other types of tumors,” Balaj said in the press release.
However, MGH’s new ddPCR assay has an overall sensitivity rate of 62.5% and a specificity of 90%, which represents a tenfold improvement over prior assays for TERT mutations in the blood.
And when testing the performance of the ddPCR assay in tumor tissue, the MGH researchers discovered their results were the same as results from a previous independently-performed clinical laboratory assessment of TERT mutations within collected tumor specimens. They also found that their assay could detect TERT mutations when looking at blood plasma samples collected at other facilities.
The researchers believe that their test could be performed in most clinical laboratories and can be utilized to follow the course of disease in cancer patients. The MGH researcher’s goal is to expand and adapt the blood test to diagnose, differentiate, and monitor other types of brain tumors in addition to gliomas.
Of course, more research will be needed before MGH’s new assay can become a vital tool in the fight against disease. However, this type of genetic analysis may soon provide pathologists with new techniques to more accurately diagnose and monitor cancers, and to provide healthcare providers with valuable data regarding which therapies would be the most beneficial for individual patients, a key element of precision medicine.
Critical shortages in medical laboratory workers and supplies are yet to be offset by new applicants and improved supply chains. But there is cause for hope.
Medical laboratory scientists (aka, medical technologists) can be hard to find and retain under normal circumstances. During the current coronavirus pandemic, that’s becoming even more challenging. As demand for COVID-19 tests increases, clinical laboratories need more technologists and lab scientists with certifications, skills, and experience to perform these complex assays. But how can lab managers find, attract, and retain them?
The Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center reports that as of mid-October more than one million tests for SARS-CoV-2 were being performed daily in the US. And as flu season approaches, the pandemic appears to be intensifying. However, supply of lab technologists remains severely constrained, as it has been for a long time.
Still, qualified medical technologists (MT) and clinical laboratory scientists (CLS) are hard to find.
Demand for COVID Tests Exceeds Available Clinical Lab Applicants
“I can replace hardware and I can manage not having enough reagents, but I can’t easily replace a qualified [medical] technologist,” said David Grenache, PhD, Chief Scientific Officer at TriCore Reference Laboratories, Albuquerque, N.M., in the WSJ.
Another area where demand outstrips supply is California. Megan Crumpler, PhD, Laboratory Director, Orange County Public Health Laboratory, told the WSJ, “We are constantly scrambling for personnel, and right now we don’t have a good feel about being able to fill these vacancies, because we know there’s not a pool of applicants.”
Are Reductions in Academic Programs Responsible for Lack of Available Lab Workers?
Recent data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show 337,800 clinical laboratory technologists and technicians employed by hospitals, public health, and commercial labs, with Job Outlook (projected percent change in employment) growing at 7% from 2019 to 2029. This, according to the BLS’ Occupational Outlook Handbook on Clinical Laboratory Technologists and Technicians, is “faster than average.”
“The average growth rate for all occupations is 4%,” the BLS notes.
Medical laboratories have the most staff vacancies in phlebotomy (13%) and the least openings in point-of-care (4%), according to an American Society for Clinical Pathology 2018 Vacancy Survey published in the American Journal of Clinical Pathology (AJCP).
Becker’s Hospital Review reported that “Labor shortages in [clinical] testing labs have existed for years due to factors including low recruitment, an aging workforce, and relatively low pay for [medical] lab technicians and technologists compared to that of other healthcare workers with similar education requirements.
“In 2019, the median annual salary for clinical laboratory technologists and technicians was $53,000, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The skills required for lab workers also are often specialized and not easily transferred from other fields.”
At the “root” of the problem, according to an article in Medical Technology Schools, is a decrease in available academic programs. Laboratory technologists require a Bachelor of Science (BS) degree and technicians need an associate degree or post-secondary certificate.
“(The programs) are expensive to offer, so when it comes to cuts and budgets, some of those cuts have been based on how much it costs to run them. That, and they may not have high enough enrollments,” said Lisa Cremeans, MMDS, CLS(NCA), MLS(ASCP), Clinical Assistant Professor at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, in the Medical Technology Schools article. (Photo copyright: University of North Carolina.)
AACC has called for federal funding of these programs, which now number 608, down from 720 programs for medical laboratory scientists in 1990.
“The pandemic has shone a spotlight on how crucial testing is to patient care. It also has revealed the weak points in our country’s [clinical laboratory] testing infrastructure, such as the fact that the US has allowed the number of laboratory training programs to diminish for years now,” said Grenache, who is also AACC President, in a news release.
Creative Staffing Strategies Clinical Labs Can Take Now
select “apply code” and complete the registration.
How Some Clinical Labs are Coping with Staff and Recruitment Challenges
The Arizona Chamber Business News reported that Sonora Quest Laboratories in Tempe earlier this year launched “Operation Catapult” to help with a 60,000 COVID-19 test increase in daily test orders. The strategy involved hiring 215 employees and securing tests with the help of partners:
Meanwhile, students in the UMass Lowell (UML) medical laboratory science (MLS) program, see brighter skies ahead.
“The job outlook even before COVID-19 was so amazing,” said Dannalee Watson, a UML MLS student, in a news release. “It’s like you’re figuring out a puzzle with your patient. Then, we help the doctor make decisions.”
Such enthusiasm is refreshing and reassuring. In the end, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the resultant demand for clinical laboratory testing may call more students’ attention to careers in medical laboratories and actually help to solve the lab technologist/technician shortage. We can hope.
