“The decision to automate an analytical
Nevertheless, job satisfaction will play a
role in performance. Additonally, to the
extent that automation can achieve these
ends at a reasonable cost, automation
should merit consideration.
Regarding difficulty, some analyses
require skill and experience to generate
useful data. Even a simple titration can
be difficult when the color of the sample
is close to the color of the indicator.
Many microbiological analyses require a
practiced hand to make the numerous
sterile transfers required. Immunoassays
and enzyme-based assays can also be
somewhat challenging with the need for
special glassware and other supplies. Increasingly, vendors supply kits that eliminate these challenges and simplify data
generation. However, one pays for the
convenience and the technology.
Removing the tedium from the data-generation process with automation generally comes at a price. The required
level of training and expertise generally
goes up with the level of automation.
The routine operation of the instrument
may not require a highly skilled analyst,
but there generally must be a person
with special training and experience to
troubleshoot and maintain the automated analytical systems. Installing a sophisticated automated method in a
laboratory setting where only simple,
wet chemistry-style testing is done will
require significant training and should
not be considered lightly.
However, as illustrated above, it is
possible to reduce the tedium associated
with data generation without incurring
the full overhead of complete automation. Clearly, balancing automation with
laboratory needs will minimize the tedium and facilitate testing.
•
•
procedure will always be driven by an
understanding of the purpose for doing the test.”
Benefits and Potential Costs
In making a decision to automate an
analytical procedure, there is frequently
a desire to leap to the cost-benefit analysis. However, has we have already discussed, other areas need to be
considered first. One must know what is
needed and what will be the best approach. These decisions can get circular
with a cost-benefit analysis, but there is
no way to complete such an analysis
without a list of approaches that need to
be considered.
When looking at the cost-benefit
analysis associated with the various de-
grees of automation, there are a number
of benefits and costs to consider:
• There is the potential for personnel
savings as machines and computers
provide control for the analysis. Un-
fortunately, the dollar savings per re-
sult may be illusory as the analyst
using the automated system may be
paid more per hour than a technician
who might perform a manual assay.
Increased precision is often possible
with automated systems. Computers
and digital control will reduce the
variance in analytical procedures.
• Accuracy may or may not be increased. Generally, the manual system and the automated system will
have very similar detection limits and
accuracies because these features are
inherent to the ability to test for a
particular analyte. If more accuracy is
needed, an alternative approach may
be required.
The economic benefits of automated
data logging can be hard to quantify.
The greatest benefit accrues from
avoiding transcription errors and the
increased reliability of determinations. This reliability increases confidence in decisions based on the
logged data, but prior to the automation, every effort was already made to
get the right answers.
• Capital costs and costs per analysis
for materials are important to the decision to automate. Automated systems tend to rely on specialized
consumables that facilitate sample
handling. These consumables are generally single-use and it is not cost-effective to wash them.
sion to automate an analytical procedure
can only be made in the context of the
need and purpose for testing. This estab-lishes the requirements that must be
met. There are also a series of parameters
that should be either maximized or minimized to achieve optimal performance.
These elements are the “musts” and
“wants” by which alternative protocols
and automation schemes can be compared. The best alternative will include
the proper degree of automation and, if
information is developed to the fullest
extent possible, will even help in selecting the particular model and brand of
automation.
Unfortunately, even with the best intentions, information will be incomplete
and imperfect. There will still be some
subjective aspects to the automation decision, such as the personal relationship
with the automation vendor and the specific technical support personnel. Not all
vendors perform equally in all parts of
the country. Getting testimonials from
respected colleagues regarding the performance of various alternatives will be
critical to making the best possible decision. Testimonials from vendors can be
screened for successful installations and
not include organizations where the
equipment was misplaced or was a poor
fit.
We have examined the various criteria that can be used to compare various
approaches to generating analytical data.
These approaches will include various
degrees of automation and associated
capital costs. Each approach will have
costs and benefits. This matrix of approaches and criteria will provide a solid
basis for making a sound decision. n
Decision Making
Ultimately, few decisions are better
than the information upon which they
are made. Better information is usually
better than luck or intuition. The deci-
Eric Wilhelmsen, Ph.D. is a recognized
world authority in food authentication,
serving for over 25 years in both academic
and industrial positions. He can be
reached at the Alliance of Technical
Professionals.
