Request Demo
Contact Us

Laboratory Profession

Blog

Understanding Reference Ranges: How Are They Established and Why Do They Matter?

/

When you run testing for a patient, you get results or numbers. How do you interpret those numbers? You use reference ranges to help define normal versus abnormal results. This is why reference ranges are so important. The way reference ranges are established is even more important. Have you ever wondered where these numbers actually come from? Why might the same test have different reference ranges at different laboratories? Does a result outside the reference range automatically mean something is wrong with the patient? Reference ranges are more than just numbers printed beside a patient’s results. They are an important part of laboratory testing, helping healthcare providers interpret results and make informed decisions about patient care. What Are Reference Ranges? A reference range, also known as a reference interval, is a set of values used to help determine whether a patient’s laboratory result falls within an expected range. Reference intervals are typically established by collecting and analyzing samples from a group of individuals considered to be healthy. The results are then evaluated statistically to determine the range of values expected for that population. Most conventional reference intervals represent the central 95% of values from a selected reference population (ASCLS, 2019; Centra Diagnostics, n.d.). What does that actually mean? It means that approximately 95% of healthy individuals in that population are expected to have results within the reference interval. The remaining 5% may have results outside the interval, even though they are healthy. Reference intervals only provide a starting point for interpreting results. They should always be considered alongside the patient’s clinical history, symptoms, and other laboratory findings (Centra Diagnostics, n.d.). How Are Reference Ranges Established? Reference intervals are not randomly selected. Establishing them involves several steps, including selecting an appropriate reference population, collecting and analyzing specimens, and using statistical methods to determine the expected distribution of results (Higgins, 2009). Step 1: Selecting a Reference Population The first step is selecting individuals who represent the population for which the reference interval will be used. These individuals are generally considered healthy based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria (NIH/PMC, n.d.). Age, sex, pregnancy status, and other physiological characteristics may influence the results. Depending on the analyte, separate reference intervals may be necessary for different patient populations. For example, think about hemoglobin. The expected values for a newborn differ from those for an adult. Using the same reference interval for both populations could lead to incorrect interpretation (Centra Diagnostics, n.d.). This is why selecting the appropriate reference population is such an important part of the process. Step 2: Collecting and Testing Samples Once the reference population has been selected, specimens are collected and analyzed. For the traditional nonparametric method, guidelines generally recommend collecting samples from at least 120 reference individuals to establish a reference interval. This sample size allows laboratories to estimate the central 95% of results and calculate confidence limits around the upper and lower reference limits (Higgins, 2009; NIH/PMC, n.d.). Preanalytical variables must also be controlled. These include: For example, cortisol concentrations naturally fluctuate throughout the day. If specimens are collected at inconsistent times, those differences could influence the distribution of results. Standardizing collection and testing conditions helps ensure that the resulting reference interval reflects the intended population rather than avoidable variations in specimen collection or handling. Step 3: Using Statistics to Establish the Reference Interval After the specimens have been analyzed, the laboratory uses statistical methods to determine the reference interval. One commonly recommended approach is the nonparametric method. With this approach, the laboratory arranges the results from lowest to highest and identifies the values corresponding to the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles. These two values become the lower and upper reference limits (Higgins, 2009; NIH/PMC, n.d.). Imagine you have laboratory results from 120 healthy individuals. After arranging the results from lowest to highest, you identify the values that represent the central 95% of the population. Approximately 2.5% of the values fall below the lower limit, and another 2.5% fall above the upper limit. The values between those limits form the reference interval. It is important to remember that this statistical process identifies what is typical for the selected population, not necessarily what is ideal for every patient’s health. Establishing vs. Verifying Reference Intervals: What’s the Difference? Not every laboratory establishes its own reference intervals. Establishing reference intervals requires considerable time, resources, and access to an appropriate reference population. Many laboratories adopt reference intervals provided by manufacturers or established through published studies. This does not mean laboratories should automatically accept those intervals without proper evaluation. This is where reference interval verification comes in. Establishing a reference interval means generating the data needed to determine the limits. Verifying a reference interval means evaluating whether an existing interval is appropriate for the laboratory’s method and patient population. According to the CLSI approach discussed by NIH, a laboratory can use a verification procedure involving 20 appropriately selected reference individuals. If no more than two of the 20 results fall outside the proposed reference interval, the interval may be considered acceptable under that procedure. If three or more results fall outside the interval, further investigation and additional data may be necessary. This is a more practical way to evaluate existing reference intervals without conducting a new study. Why Do Reference Ranges Differ Between Laboratories? Have you ever noticed that two laboratories may report slightly different reference intervals for the same test? This does not mean one laboratory is wrong. Reference intervals can vary for several reasons. 1. Testing methods and instrumentation Different analyzers, reagents, and analytical methods may produce slightly different results. Therefore, a reference interval established using one method may not always be appropriate for another. 2. Patient populations The population used to establish a reference interval matters. Age, sex, pregnancy, and other physiological characteristics may influence expected laboratory values. 3. Specimen type Serum, plasma, and whole blood are not always interchangeable. Depending on the analyte, the specimen type can influence the measured result and the reference interval. 4. Preanalytical variables Fasting status,

Blog

Building a More Engaged Laboratory Team in High-Stress Environments

/

By Amari Henderson, MBA, MLS (ASCP) The medical laboratory profession can, at times, feel complicated and overwhelming. If we are being honest, many healthcare professions can feel this way when you connect each piece of your job to a living, breathing patient who is relying on you to produce quality work. The major question is: how do you keep a team engaged in a high-stress work environment? Engaged employees tend to have an emotional connection to their organization, which leads to higher retention and lower turnover rates. Motivation is crucial to employee engagement and overall workplace satisfaction. Motivational levels are related to job satisfaction and are influenced by factors such as leadership style, financial compensation, and career development opportunities. Studies show that extrinsic motivational factors such as pay, can have a slightly greater influence than intrinsic motivation factors. This highlights the importance of ensuring staff are fairly compensated, consistently recognized, and provided with opportunities for advancement. Leadership plays a critical role in shaping engagement. Leaders who are supportive, transparent, and actively involved in the work environment contribute to higher motivation levels among employees. Immerse yourself in each part of the work environment, perform regular rounding, and take note of what can be improved. Staff do not want to feel like leadership is placing a temporary “bandage” over deeper issues while attempting to increase engagement but ignoring the major challenges they face daily. Focus on implementing real, measurable changes. Avoid making false promises or simply telling staff what they want to hear. Be open, honest, and accountable. A lack of recognition and reward can also contribute to low motivation and disengagement. Personalized messages acknowledging staff for their accomplishments can foster a sense of purpose and belonging. Make it a priority to show up to each department regularly and recognize what is going well. Nominate staff for facility-wide awards and highlight their contributions. It also helps to present opportunities for growth such as conferences, continuing education programs, and scholarship opportunities. These opportunities can enhance both their professional development and overall quality of life. Effective communication is another key driver of engagement. Promote and practice open, honest, and clear communication. Utilizing structured communication tools such as SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation) can improve clarity and efficiency. Create opportunities for regular one-on-one meetings or check-ins, even if they are brief, to allow employees to voice concerns and feel heard. At the same time, be mindful of information overload, as excessive communication without clear direction can be counterproductive. Regularly gathering feedback from employees is essential to evaluating the effectiveness of engagement strategies and making necessary adjustments. Finally, provide respect and empathy in all interactions. An employee’s emotional state is closely tied to their level of motivation and engagement. When employees begin to withdraw or feel the need to conceal their identities, ideas, or concerns, they often become disengaged and defensive. This not only impacts morale but can also negatively affect job performance and overall team dynamics. Creating a psychologically safe environment where employees feel valued, respected, and supported can significantly improve both engagement and performance outcomes. References Karaferis, D., Aletras, V., Raikou, M., & Niakas, D. (2022). Factors Influencing Motivation and Work Engagement of Healthcare Professionals. Materia socio-medica, 34(3), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.5455/msm.2022.34.216-224 Osborne, S., & Hammoud, M. (2019). Effective Employee Engagement in the Workplace. International Journal of Applied Management and Technology, 16(1), 50–67. https://doi.org/10.5590/IJAMT.2017.16.1.04 Scholarworks, S., & Treadway, J. (2021). Trust-Building Strategies Laboratory Managers Use to Cultivate Trust-Building Strategies Laboratory Managers Use to Cultivate the Engagement of Laboratory Employees the Engagement of Laboratory Employees. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=12703&context=dissertations

Blog, Laboratory General

Always Audit-Ready: Why Digital Maintenance Logs Are a Must for Modern Labs

/

Understanding the Context Behind the Divide In many clinical and research laboratories, essential routines such as maintenance logs, equipment calibration records, temperature logs, daily operational checklists, quality control, and training sign-offs still live in paper binders or scattered spreadsheets. It may feel manageable, but the hidden cost of these “home-grown” systems grows daily. Whether you’re a bench technologist, supervisor, manager, or lab director, you’ve likely faced the same challenges — forgotten tasks, incomplete documentation, illegible records, and the scramble to find reports before an audit. The Real Cost of Staying Manual When laboratories rely on paper or Excel instead of a dedicated digital maintenance log platform, inefficiencies multiply. 1. Missed or delayed tasks Technologists juggle multiple responsibilities. When reminders rely on memory, things get missed. Managers often discover overdue work too late, forcing last-minute fixes and compliance stress. 2. No data validation or accuracy Paper systems can’t confirm if data was entered correctly or on time. Errors often surface during review, leading to corrective actions, deviation reports, and wasted staff hours correcting preventable mistakes. 3. Disorganization and wasted time (1981–1996)Logs stored in different folders or binders make it impossible to see the full picture. Supervisors spend hours flipping through pages or spreadsheets instead of focusing on quality oversight. 4. Lack of visibility and accountabilityWithout a centralized laboratory dashboard, leaders can’t instantly see overdue tasks, incomplete logs, or recurring quality trends. The result is reactive management instead of proactive control. 5. Compliance gaps Handwritten or scattered records can be misplaced, faded, or incomplete. During inspections, missing records or incomplete documentation can quickly trigger audit findings. 6.Operational inefficiencyFragmented systems cause duplicate data entry, manual reconciliation, and poor traceability , slowing down workflows and clouding performance insights. A Unified Platform for Every Task and Every Role Modern labs need more than a digital replica of paper logs. They need a centralized, role-based system to manage all routine tasks,  maintenance, operations, quality, training, and task assignments. That’s exactly what Lab Symplified delivers. Lab Symplified’s  cloud-based digital lab management platform allows your team to: ·  Digitise every checklist and log (routine and preventative maintenance logs, checklist, temperature logs,training sign-offs etc).·  Assign tasks with built-in reminders and escalation so nothing falls off the radar.·  Support electronic sign-off and review workflows with full traceability.·  Upload attachments (calibration reports, service reports, pictures etc) tied to each log entry.·  Instantly generate audit-ready reports.·  Move from fragmented spreadsheets to one secure, role-based platform. Why Electronic Logs Beats “Home-Grown” Systems Paper and spreadsheets are passive. They don’t remind, assign, or validate. A digital maintenance log system does: ·  Automates accountability : Set tasks once; they stay live with alerts and dashboards.·  Standardizes workflows : Every technologist and department follows the same process.·  Provides real-time insight : Managers know exactly what’s complete or overdue.·  Delivers instant audit readiness : One click shows who did what, when, and with what evidence.·  Reduces cost : Fewer audit findings, repeat tests, and wasted hours chasing records. How Lab Symplified Closes the Loop Lab Symplified unifies maintenance logging, task management, and quality oversight in one secure, cloud-based platform built specifically for labs, not generic office software. Whether you’re running a small hospital lab or a multi-site network, Lab Symplified scales with your workflow, assigns by role, and provides real-time oversight. The moment you eliminate paper, you regain control, tasks get done, records are accurate, training is documented, and audits become stress-free. If your lab still relies on binders or spreadsheets, the cost is already adding up.With Lab Symplified, you gain clarity, compliance, and efficiency, all in one electronic maintenance log system.

Blog, Laboratory General

The Silent Divide: How Generational Tensions Are Affecting Laboratory Teams

/

Understanding the Context Behind the Divide By Amari Henderson, MBA, MLS (ASCP) Generational tensions can be a sensitive but very real issue within clinical laboratories today. These divides and their impact on workplace culture, mentorship, and retention are increasingly worth discussing. Clinical laboratories are facing a workforce crisis, with experienced professionals retiring and younger scientists entering the field with new expectations, communication styles, and learning preferences. Many newer MLS professionals report feeling unwelcome or undervalued by their older colleagues, while senior staff express frustration with changing work attitudes, a perceived lack of resilience, or a dependence on technology. How can laboratories acknowledge these frustrations while fostering an environment that encourages open communication, mutual respect, and adaptability? First, it’s essential to understand that context, culture, and personal experience matter far more than generational assumptions. Generalizing characteristics to large groups can backfire as some individuals feel mischaracterized or pigeonholed when labeled by their generation (Bentley University, 2025). In a lab setting, applying generational labels like “Boomers resist change” or “Gen Z doesn’t want to work” can hinder collaboration or silence valid feedback. Encouraging teams to see each other as individuals first, rather than as stereotypes, builds psychological safety and creates space for genuine communication. As Johns Hopkins University (2022) emphasizes, values shift over time. Work ethic, loyalty, communication preferences, and adaptability are shaped not only by when someone was born, but also by their lived experiences, training environments, and evolving workplace norms. Generations in the Laboratory Workforce Today’s clinical laboratories often host a mix of mainly four generations. Each generation is shaped by the era they grew up in and the rapid evolution of technology and work culture (Bentley University, 2025). While it’s helpful to understand broad traits, these are not absolutes, and individuals within each generation vary widely. Baby Boomers (1946–1964)·  Defined by strong work ethic, institutional loyalty, and face-to-face communication·  Often supervisors or senior techs·  May rely on manual processes and established routines, sometimes skeptical of rapid tech adoption Generation X (1965–1980)·  Independent, pragmatic, and adaptable, bridging analog and digital eras·  Serve as natural mediators between older and younger staff·  Value efficiency and autonomy in workflow Millennials (1981–1996)·  Purpose-driven, tech-comfortable, and collaboration-focused·  Value flexibility and feedback·  Often advocate for digital transformation and innovation in processes·  Appreciate clear communication and mentorship Generation Z (1997–2009)·  Digital natives who expect fast access to data and transparency·  Value inclusivity and work-life balance·  Quickly adapt to new lab software and automation·  Prefer streamlined workflows and visual dashboards Recognizing these characteristics helps teams understand tendencies, rather than defining individuals. A healthy workplace acknowledges diversity within generations and encourages cross-generational curiosity rather than criticism. Where the Disconnect Begins Generational tension in the lab often stems from differing approaches to learning, feedback, and technology: ·  Training and Mentorship: Senior staff may feel new hires lack patience or initiative, while newer MLS professionals may feel dismissed or micromanaged.·  Technology Adoption: Statements like “we’ve always done it this way” frustrate younger professionals accustomed to automation and real-time transparency.·  Work Ethic Perception: Older professionals may associate dedication with long hours and endurance; younger staff may associate it with innovation, precision, and efficiency. However, these are not signs of incompatibility; they’re opportunities for balance. Experience provides wisdom and context. Innovation brings efficiency and adaptability. The Hidden Cost of Division Unchecked generational division doesn’t just affect morale; it impacts retention, productivity, and compliance. Newer staff may leave when they feel undervalued or unsupported. Senior staff may experience burnout when they feel their experience isn’t respected. Training gaps widen, communication falters, and collaboration gives way to frustration. According to Bentley University (2025), stereotyping generational traits can demotivate employees, especially when individuals feel boxed in or misunderstood. This type of disengagement can result in laboratories losing valuable institutional knowledge and hindering progress toward digital transformation. Bridging the Gap: From Gatekeeping to Mentorship To strengthen laboratory culture, leadership must intentionally bridge the generational divide through communication and shared learning. Strategies to Foster Collaboration: · Structured Mentorship Programs: Pair experienced professionals with new hires to promote mutual learning rather than one-sided instruction.· Reverse Mentorship: Encourage younger staff to share technology-driven efficiencies while learning institutional best practices.· Promote Psychological Safety: Create an environment where every technologist, whether new or seasoned, can ask questions without judgment.· Shared Visibility Through Digital Tools: Platforms like Lab Symplified provide centralized, traceable maintenance logs and records, helping teams work from the same transparent source of truth. As Bentley University (2025) notes, when organizations intentionally leverage generational diversity, it becomes a strategic advantage, combining depth of experience with a fresh perspective. From Division to Legacy Generational diversity in the clinical laboratory is not a weakness; it is a strength. It reflects the field’s evolution. Experienced technologists protect legacy, accuracy, and quality. Newer professionals bring innovation, adaptability, and a forward-thinking approach. When teams replace gatekeeping with guidance and assumptions with curiosity, they build a culture that values both tradition and transformation. The future of laboratory medicine depends not on one generation, but on all of them, working together to advance patient care and uphold the integrity of the profession. References Bentley University. (2025, May 15). Today’s unprecedented six-generation workforce. Retrieved from https://www.bentley.edu/magazine/six-generation-workforce Johns Hopkins University. (2022, November 17). The changing generational values. Imagine Center for Integrative Learning and Life Design. Retrieved from https://imagine.jhu.edu/blog/2022/11/17/the-changing-generational-values/

Blog

Recruiting Laboratory Professionals: A Psychology-Informed Playbook

/

Author:  Darryl Elzie, PsyD. MHA, MLS (ASCP), CQA (ASQ) Clinical labs are hiring in a tight market.  Retirement, attrition, and burnout have combined to challenge lab managers and HR in finding qualified individuals.  Instead of changing how and where jobs are posted, a recruitment team should make some behavioral changes in how they go about getting medical technicians and technologists in the door. The following is a psychology-based strategy and current workforce data. I’ve included some specific actions in developing high school and college medical laboratory pipelines, why certification boosts marketability, and what the future looks like. Use motivational psychological science at every touchpoint High-school pipeline College pipeline Why certification is important  A 10-week framework Weeks 1–2: Publish a one-page “Lab Careers Fast Facts” (outlook, salary bands, certification routes, local programs). Add QR codes to an interest form and “shadow a scientist” sign-up. Weeks 3–4: High-school pop-ups and counselor nights; near-peer reels; launch paid summer assistant posting. Weeks 5–6: University blitz—faculty drop-ins, student org talks, Handshake ads; announce certification exam-fee coverage and bridge scholarships. Weeks 7–8: Saturday Open House with micro-experiments; same-day conditional offers for summer roles. Weeks 9–10: Kick off MLT to MLS bridge; assign mentors; send “Choose Your Path” emails (MLT, MLS, categorical, phlebotomy) with timelines. Future outlook BLS projects 5% job growth (2023–2033) for clinical laboratory technologists/technicians—about average—with ~24,200 openings annually driven by retirements, transfers, and demand from aging populations, chronic disease testing, and prenatal/genetic diagnostics. (Bureau of Labor Statistics) Across healthcare broadly, employment is set to grow “much faster than average,” so competition for talent will remain intense. (Bureau of Labor Statistics) Public-health lab surveys show recruitment and retention remain pivotal; APHL’s 2024 profile and “What Matters to New Hires” data point to work/life balance, safety, competitive pay, benefits, and flexible schedules as top attractors/retainers. Closing In an era of workforce shortages and rising healthcare demands, clinical laboratories cannot rely on traditional recruitment tactics alone. By applying psychologically informed strategies, grounded in motivation, identity formation, and career self-efficacy, laboratories can build pipelines that engage students early, empower college graduates, and position certification as both an attainable milestone and a differentiator in the job market. The future of laboratory medicine depends not only on technology and innovation, but also on our ability to attract, develop, and retain the next generation of professionals from a broader and more diverse labor pool. Forward-thinking outreach, coupled with flexible human resources practices, will ensure that laboratories remain resilient, patient-centered, and equipped with the talent necessary to advance diagnostic excellence for years to come. References U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Clinical Laboratory Technologists and Technicians—Occupational Outlook Handbook. Job outlook (5% growth, ~24,200 openings/yr), licensure/certification notes. (Bureau of Labor Statistics) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Healthcare Occupations—Overview. Sector-wide growth outlook (2023–2033). (Bureau of Labor Statistics) American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP). Vacancy Survey Results Show Workforce Challenges Amplified After Pandemic. Difficulty hiring certified staff; some labs relaxing requirements. (ASCP) NAACLS. CEO’s Corner: Findings from the 2023 Annual Survey. Outcomes benchmarks (≥70% placement within one year), stability of outcomes, program trends. (naacls.org) Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL). 2024 Laboratory Workforce Profile—Survey Summary Report. Recruitment/retention insights for lab leaders. APHL. What Matters to New Hires (2024 Infographic). Top factors influencing acceptance/retention (work/life balance, safety, pay, benefits, flexibility).

Laboratory General

Reimagining Lab Work: The Case for Hybrid and Remote Roles

/

By: Amari Henderson, MBA, MLS The Debate on Remote and Hybrid Lab Roles The question of whether medical laboratory scientist roles can evolve into remote or hybrid positions has sparked intense discussions. A recent poll revealed that 39% of respondents believe remote work is possible, while another 39% think it’s worth exploring. However, 12% preferred hybrid roles, and 9% were adamant that lab work needs to remain on-site. The comments from professionals highlight both practical challenges and potential opportunities in transitioning lab jobs to a hybrid model. The Case for Hybrid and Remote Lab Roles Certain aspects of laboratory work undeniably require a physical presence—handling specimens, maintaining instruments, and troubleshooting unexpected results. However, many professionals argue that ancillary lab roles are already remote or have the potential to be. Some key areas include: Point-of-Care (POC) Testing and Hybrid Possibilities Point-of-Care (POC) testing is one area where hybrid roles are already being implemented. POC coordinators and specialists often travel between facilities to ensure compliance, train staff, and troubleshoot issues, but much of their work—such as data review, policy writing, and quality assurance—can be done remotely. As POC technology advances, there is increasing potential for hybrid roles where professionals oversee multiple locations from a centralized remote setting. Addressing the Root Cause: Why the Desire for Remote Work? The push for remote work in laboratory professions may not be solely about convenience but could reflect deeper workplace challenges. Some key reasons include: Far Far Away Let’s be honest—most of us got into the lab field because we wanted to help patients… from a distance. We actively chose the least patient-facing role in healthcare, and now, here we are, trying to figure out how to get even further away. One commenter in the poll put it bluntly: “Why go into a ‘hands-on’ profession if you don’t want to be there? Instruments need maintenance. Specimens and questionable results require us to look at them. Tip them back and forth. Check them for clots. One can’t do that working remotely.” Fair point! On the other hand, another professional noted that hybrid work is already a reality: “There will always be a need for on-site staff to physically do testing, and on-site support to oversee that. But there are tons of ancillary supporting roles that can be done remotely and currently exist out there for those with the patience to find them.” So, maybe we aren’t totally crazy for wanting to swap out our lab coats for pajamas, at least part of the time. Could Alternative Work Schedules Be a Solution? Instead of transitioning fully to remote work, exploring alternative workweek structures might address some of the same concerns. Options such as: These adjustments could improve work-life balance without completely shifting the industry away from its hands-on nature. The Future of Hybrid Lab Roles While not every lab job can become remote, it’s clear that hybrid models are feasible and already in place in some areas. As technology evolves and workforce expectations shift, laboratory professionals and healthcare organizations should continue exploring flexible work arrangements that balance efficiency, employee satisfaction, and patient care needs. By addressing the root causes behind the desire for remote work, the industry may find innovative solutions that benefit everyone. Tell us what you think in the comment section.

Retention
Laboratory General

Staff Retention Techniques for Lab Leaders: Insights from the Frontlines

/

Staff retention in the medical laboratory field is more critical than ever, as high turnover rates continue to disrupt workflow, decrease morale, and impact patient care. To gain firsthand insights into the challenges faced by lab professionals and what would encourage them to remain in the field, Lab Symplified surveyed members of a Medical Laboratory Scientist Facebook group with over 50,000 members. There were over 130 responses. Their candid responses offer a wealth of actionable strategies that lab leaders can implement to create supportive, efficient, and rewarding work environments. Key Challenges Faced by Lab Professionals The responses revealed several common stressors that contribute to dissatisfaction and burnout: Staffing Shortages: Inadequate Pay and Benefits: Poor Work-Life Balance: Lack of Training and Career Development: Toxic Work Environments: Lack of Recognition and Respect: Strategies for Retaining Lab Professionals Lab leaders can address these challenges by implementing practical solutions that enhance employee satisfaction and retention: 1. Improve Staffing Levels 2. Offer Competitive Compensation and Benefits 3. Enhance Work-Life Balance 4. Invest in Training and Career Development 5. Foster a Positive Workplace Culture 6. Advocate for the Profession Real Impact: Quotes from Lab Professionals Several respondents shared examples of successful retention strategies: Retaining skilled laboratory professionals requires a multilayered approach that addresses staffing, compensation, training, culture, and recognition. Lab Symplified sought to hear concerns directly from lab professionals. By listening to employees’ feedback and implementing thoughtful changes, lab leaders can create an environment where professionals feel valued and supported—ensuring the long-term success of both the team and the organization.

Medical Lab Scientist
Laboratory General, Medical Laboratory Science Career

MLS vs MLT : Exploring The Differences Between Medical Lab Scientists and Medical Lab Technicians

/

By: Darryl Elzie, PsyD, MHA, MLS (ASCP), CQA (ASQ) In the complex world of clinical laboratories, two key professionals ensure accurate and timely diagnostic results: Medical Laboratory Scientists (MLS) and Medical Laboratory Technicians (MLT). While their roles may overlap in specific tasks, these professions have distinct educational requirements, responsibilities, and wage differences. The wage disparity, while often a source of frustration for some, is rooted in educational qualifications and regulatory requirements. Let’s explore why. Educational Requirements and Responsibilities One of the fundamental differences between an MLS and an MLT is the level of education required. Medical Laboratory Scientists typically hold, at a minimum, a bachelor’s degree in medical laboratory science or a physical, chemical, or biological science. These degrees include extensive coursework in biology, chemistry, microbiology, and clinical laboratory procedures.  In contrast, Medical Laboratory Technicians are generally required to complete a two-year associate’s degree program. While both degree programs involve practical laboratory experience, the scope and depth of MLS training are broader, covering advanced diagnostic techniques, laboratory management, and quality assurance practices. These educational differences translate into distinct responsibilities in many laboratory settings. MLS professionals are often tasked with more complex diagnostic testing, problem-solving, and supervisory duties. They may be responsible for interpreting complex test results, validating laboratory methods, or overseeing the work of MLTs and other staff.  MLTs, while highly skilled, typically perform routine testing, and their scope of practice may be limited in certain states due to regulatory restrictions.  It should be noted that in laboratories serving rural or medically underserved communities, MLTs can be found operating the entire laboratory. Wage Disparities: Data from the ASCP Wage Survey The 2021 wage survey from the American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP) highlights a significant pay gap between Medical Laboratory Scientists and Medical Laboratory Technicians. According to the survey, MLS professionals earn a mean annual salary of $66,476, whereas MLTs earn approximately $51,792. This wage disparity—roughly 22%—can be attributed primarily to the differences in education, certification, and the complexity of the tasks performed.  However, the impact of the type and location of the laboratory should not be discounted. Psychological Impact: Frustration Among Medical Laboratory Technicians Despite these wage differences being driven mainly by educational requirements and regulatory standards, it’s not uncommon for MLTs to experience frustration. Many MLTs perform nearly identical tasks to their MLS colleagues, such as running diagnostic tests, analyzing samples, and ensuring quality control. This overlap in duties can create a sense of inequity, especially when the pay difference becomes evident. From a psychological perspective, this wage gap can lead to feelings of underappreciation among MLTs. Across industries, wage disparities negatively affect job satisfaction. Medical laboratory technicians who perceive they are doing “the same work for less pay” may experience decreased motivation, higher turnover rates, and burnout.  This sentiment is exacerbated in understaffed laboratories, where both MLSs and MLTs are often stretched thin due to the growing demand for diagnostic testing. Results from a 2024 study concluded that low staffing levels is another variable significantly impacting laboratory job satisfaction and morale despite increased compensation. Supporting the Wage Difference: Education, Regulations, and Responsibilities While the frustration of MLTs is understandable, the wage gap is supported by the additional education and regulatory requirements for MLS professionals. The bachelor’s degree required for MLS roles not only includes advanced training in diagnostic testing, but also prepares scientists for leadership positions, regulatory compliance, and lab management. In addition, the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) require specific quality oversight for nonwaived moderate and high complexity tests to be conducted by individuals who are qualified as technical consultants or technical supervisors, making their role critical in meeting the clinical laboratory’s regulatory and accrediting requirements. Workforce Trends: A Growing Need for Both MLS and MLT Professionals The healthcare industry is facing a growing demand for medical laboratory professionals. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, employment of medical laboratory technologists and technicians is projected to grow 5% from 2023 to 2033, as fast as the average for all occupations. This growth is driven by an aging population, increased reliance on diagnostic testing, and the expansion of healthcare services across the country. Despite the growing demand, the industry faces significant staffing shortages, particularly for MLS professionals. The ASCP wage survey also highlighted that many laboratories are struggling to fill vacancies, with long-term positions remaining unfilled.  The shortage of MLS professionals is mainly due to the lengthy educational process, the increasing complexity of laboratory work, and the expected attrition of an aging workforce. As a result, laboratories increasingly rely on MLTs to fill the gaps, contributing to the blurred lines between the two roles. Addressing the Challenge: Opportunities for Advancement While the wage gap between MLS and MLT professionals is not likely to disappear anytime soon, there are opportunities for MLTs to advance their careers and close the pay disparity. Many MLTs choose to pursue a bachelor’s degree to become an MLS, which can open the door to higher pay and greater responsibilities. Additionally, certifications in specialized areas such as microbiology, hematology, or molecular diagnostics can enhance an MLT’s expertise and make them more valuable to employers. For MLTs seeking career advancement without returning to school full-time, many colleges and universities offer bridge programs that allow working professionals to earn their bachelor’s degrees Conclusion The wage disparity between Medical Laboratory Scientists and Medical Laboratory Technicians is a reflection of the educational requirements, responsibilities, and regulatory demands of each role. While MLTs may understandably feel frustrated over the pay gap, the regulatory required advanced education and the broader scope of practice support the higher wages for MLS professionals. Both roles are essential to the functioning of clinical laboratories. As the demand for skilled professionals continues to rise, there are opportunities for both MLS and MLTs to grow and advance in their Medical Laboratory careers. Addressing the clinical laboratory staffing shortages and providing pathways for career advancement will be vital to ensuring that both MLS and MLT professionals can thrive in the evolving healthcare landscape.

Inforgraphic for blog
Inventory Management, Laboratory General

4 Ways Labs Manage their Inventory

/

Effective inventory management is crucial for laboratories, as it ensures that essential supplies and materials are readily available for experiments, tests, and procedures. Laboratories manage inventory through various methods, ranging from traditional manual tracking systems to more sophisticated software solutions. Proper inventory management helps prevent shortages that could disrupt research or clinical workflows, reduces waste by monitoring expiration dates, and enhances overall operational efficiency. By maintaining an accurate inventory, labs can make informed decisions about restocking and resource allocation, ultimately supporting their mission to deliver reliable results and maintain high standards of quality in their work. Manual Tracking Systems Many laboratories rely on manual tracking methods, such as: Card-Based Systems Several labs use card-based systems for inventory management: Collaborative Approaches Smaller labs often rely on team effort for inventory management: Software Systems Regardless of laboratory size or inventory volume, software systems offer significant advantages over traditional methods: Enhanced Visibility: Real-time tracking of inventory levels across multiple departments and locations. Improved Control: Automated reordering, lot and expiration date tracking, and usage analytics. Data-Driven Decisions: Generate reports on inventory turnover, usage patterns, and cost analysis. Reduced Errors: Minimize human error in counting and data entry. Time Efficiency: Automate routine tasks, freeing up staff for more critical duties. Scalability: Easily adapt to growing inventory needs without major system overhauls. By implementing a software-based inventory management system, laboratories can streamline operations, reduce costs, and improve overall efficiency. Lab Symplified advantage:

way to navigate burnout
Laboratory General

Navigating Burnout in the Clinical Laboratory

/

Author: Amari Henderson, MBA, MLS (ASCP) The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly left its mark on laboratory professionals worldwide, exposing many challenges and pushing many to their limits. From increased workloads and staffing shortages to critical supply shortages, the toll on lab professionals’ well-being has been immense. So, how can the laboratory combat burnout and create a more sustainable environment? Addressing the staffing shortage is crucial. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, an average of approximately 24,000 positions for clinical laboratory technologists and technicians are projected to become available annually over the next decade. Fixing this requires not only legislative action to support recruitment efforts in educational programs but also a great effort to enhance work-life balance and recognize the importance of the field. Have open conversations about scheduling with your staff Many laboratory professionals work unconventional shifts, including weekends, holidays, and overtime hours to meet the demands of the healthcare system. Engaging employees in discussions about their preferred schedules can go a long way in fostering a supportive work environment. Some may prefer just working weekends or having flexible scheduling options that accommodate personal commitments and preferences. Leverage Technology to automate manual tasks Leveraging automation and researching technologies that can play a pivotal role in streamlining workflows can reduce burnout. By automating routine processes and repetitive tasks, laboratory professionals can focus their time and energy on more complex tasks, ultimately improving job satisfaction.  Focus on staff’s professional development Additionally, providing opportunities for professional development and advancement can help combat burnout. Investing in ongoing training and opportunities for career advancement demonstrates a commitment to the growth and well-being of laboratory professionals. Send employees to conferences and educational events. This enhances job satisfaction and equips staff with the skills needed to excel in their roles. Create and Foster culture of appreciation Creating a culture of appreciation and recognition is also essential. Acknowledging the hard work and dedication of laboratory professionals through formal recognition programs and events, can boost morale. It is important that laboratory leaders fight to ensure that the entire health system recognizes the lab. For Lab Week, showcase throughout the entire hospital or facility, the many contributions of the lab. This year’s Medical Laboratory Professionals Week is April 14th to the 20th! Promote open communication and staff input Furthermore, creating an environment with respectful and open communication can help combat feelings of hopelessness. Encouraging effective communication can help build strong relationships and create a supportive work environment where individuals feel connected and motivated to succeed. Set bi-weekly meetings with each staff member addressing concerns and reviewing progress. In conclusion, combating burnout in the laboratory requires a multifaceted approach that addresses staffing shortages, enhances work-life balance, streamlines the workflow, fosters a culture of appreciation, and creates open communication. By prioritizing the well-being and professional development of laboratory professionals, organizations can create a more fulfilling and sustainable workplace for all.

Scroll to Top