On every SSB software product
Flat 30% discount on any software
School, hospital, hotel, restaurant, HR, lab, pharma and the rest of our software. Ask for a quote and we apply 30% on the price. Write to info@ssbconsultancy.com.
A lab does not usually lose trust in the analyser. It loses trust between the collection counter and the report: a sample that cannot be tied to a person, a result copied by hand, and a printed sheet the patient has to come back for.
At a collection counter the patient name is written on a vial and again in a register. A second patient with a similar name is in the same batch. If the label smudges, the lab tech has to stop and ask. That pause is how a sample is tested under the wrong name. The patient may never know. The lab knows only when a value is impossible and someone checks.
Results take a second journey. The analyser prints a tape. Someone types it into a Word report or a spreadsheet. The pathologist signs a printout. The patient comes back, or calls, or sends someone. A critical value sits on the tape until the report is typed. The delay is not the machine. It is the copying.
A lab with collection centres feels this across the city. Samples arrive without a reliable list of what was drawn. The centre tells the patient the report is ready. The processing lab has not received the sample. Both are telling the truth about different registers.
Lab software puts a barcode on the sample at registration. That number is the worklist, the result and the report. A value is entered once, or received from the analyser where the interface is in scope, and the pathologist authorises it. The patient can receive the report on WhatsApp or email. Collection centres register into the same list the processing lab works from.
Collection, lab and report share one number
A value is typed or received once, then authorised
The patient gets the report without another visit for the paper
Collection points register into the same worklist
Handwritten labels and a paper register cannot prove which vial belongs to which patient.
Results are copied from the analyser tape into a report, and the copy is where errors enter.
Patients return to the lab because the report exists only as a printout at the counter.
Collection centres and the main lab each keep a list, so a sample can be “sent” and still be missing.
Someone asking for a quality file — who collected, who resulted, who authorised — is handed a register.
Registration prints a barcode. Scanning that code opens the right patient and the right tests.
The result is stored once and flows into the report. Authorisation is a step, not a signature on a loose sheet.
After authorisation the report can go by WhatsApp or email, and the lab can still print it.
Collection centres register into the worklist the processing lab sees. Status is visible at both ends.
The record shows collection, result and authorisation. That is the file you keep, instead of a rewritten register.
Profiles, prices and the report format your doctors already expect. We list analysers only if you want them connected. Billing can go live before any interface.
One counter registers and labels. The lab works that worklist. The old register stays beside it until the batch matches.
Pathologist authorisation and the patient message. Collection centres join after the main lab trusts the status.
If an analyser supports it, results can flow in. We do not block go-live on that connection.
The label is printed from the registration, not written by hand. The code opens that patient’s tests. The person loading the analyser scans it instead of matching a name on a vial to a name in a book. Similar names stop being the way a sample is identified.
Yes, after the pathologist authorises it. The lab can send the report on WhatsApp or email and still print a copy. The patient is not asked to come back only because the paper is at the counter.
No. Many labs start with registration, barcode, manual result entry and the report. An analyser connection is a later step when the model supports it. Going live does not wait for that cable.
Yes. Each centre registers samples into the same worklist. The processing lab sees what is coming. The centre can tell the patient the real status instead of guessing.
No. Accreditation is awarded to the lab, not to a product. The software keeps the trace the assessment asks to see: who collected the sample, what was resulted, who authorised the report, and the quality records you configure. Your quality manager still runs the assessment.
Queues, missing old reports and a bill that does not match the pharmacy. How hospital software keeps the visit, the bill and the stock together.
PF, ESI and a duty roster that does not match who was on the floor. How HRMS covers company payroll and the staff records a hospital is asked to show.
Lost KOTs, a bill argued at the table and stock that does not match what was cooked. How restaurant software ties the order, the kitchen and the GST bill.
Tell us the operation that is breaking. We will walk that screen and send a written quote.
We reply instantly
