In modern healthcare, most clinical decisions are influenced by diagnostic results, yet the pathway from analysis to clinical action remains inefficient and error-prone. While diagnostic results are typically small data sets, manual handling introduces risk by breaking the link between the right result, the right patient, and the right clinical context.
This white paper examines the need for seamless, bidirectional integration between medical diagnostic systems and EPR platforms. It addresses two common integration patterns: structured laboratory results that flow directly into EPRs, and image-based diagnostics where images are stored in cloud platforms while EPRs manage patient context, interpretation, and secure access. In both cases, bidirectional communication ensures patient and order verification, accurate result linkage, and clinical safety.
Manual processes consume significant clinical time, introduce transcription errors, delay result availability, and increase regulatory risk. Vendor-agnostic, bidirectional integration eliminates these failures by ensuring accurate data exchange, faster turnaround times, regulatory compliance, and measurable return on investment. For healthcare organisations focused on patient safety and efficiency, diagnostic-EPR integration is essential.
Laboratory automation projects fail at an alarming rate. Industry studies show that between 40 and 60 per cent of laboratory information system implementations miss critical objectives, exceed budgets, or fail to achieve expected ROI. The primary culprit is not technology inadequacy or vendor capability. The failure point occurs much earlier in the project lifecycle, at a stage many organisations rush through or skip entirely: requirements definition.
This white paper examines why comprehensive requirements definition is not merely a preliminary step but the strategic foundation that determines project success. Drawing on hundreds of laboratory automation implementations across clinical, pharmaceutical, and industrial settings, we demonstrate how investing in thorough requirements development reduces implementation risk, maximises return on investment, accelerates deployment timelines, and ensures user adoption.
Organisations that complete structured requirements development typically achieve 70 to 90 per cent reductions in manual data entry, eliminate transcription errors entirely, improve turnaround times by 20 to 40 per cent, and free up 2 to 4 hours per day of technical staff time. These outcomes are not accidental but the direct result of requirements processes that identify and quantify pain points, define specific technical specifications, and prioritise implementation based on measurable business value.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.