Audit of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Testing Turnaround Time and Operational Determinants in a Centralized Laboratory in a Resource-Limited Setting
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21276/apalm.3959Keywords:
COVID-19 testing, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), centralized laboratory network, molecular diagnostics, post-pandemic preparednessAbstract
Background: Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR turnaround time (TAT) undermines isolation decisions, bed allocation and infection control, especially in centralized, resource-limited laboratories serving large urban networks. We audited TAT performance and operational determinants in a high-throughput COVID-19 RT-PCR laboratory receiving samples from 3 hospitals, 22 urban health posts (UHP) and multiple community camps across Navi Mumbai.
Methods: In this retrospective record-based audit, all 210,179 upper respiratory swabs processed between August 2022 and January 2023 were analyzed for total TAT using routine timestamps, and a stratified subset of 1,600 samples underwent detailed phase-wise and operational factor assessment.
Result: Overall, 197,558 samples with complete core timestamps were included in TAT analysis; median total TAT was 20.5 hours (interquartile range 8 hours), and 67.01% and 98.75% of reports were issued within 24 and 48 hours, respectively. TAT varied markedly by source, with median values of 10 hours for inpatients, 20 hours for UHP, 22 hours for outpatients and 32 hours for camps. In the detailed subset, median referral and within-laboratory TAT were 3.5 and 16.5 hours respectively, with pre-analytical steps contributing the longest segment.
Conclusion: Delayed reporting beyond 24 hours occurred in 28.6% of audited samples and was strongly associated with camp origin, large batch size, reagent shortages and equipment downtime, while test platform and repeat runs were not independently significant. Targeted interventions focusing on pre-analytical workflow, scheduling of sample dispatch, batch size management and supply-chain resilience could further reduce TAT in similar centralized RT-PCR networks.
References
1. Alanazi AG, Hanbouli TM, Albarqi AS, Kateb DA, Al Rowili N, Al Jhory K, et al. Impact of Laboratory Turnaround Time on Clinical Decision-Making and Patient Outcomes. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2024;10(4):3632-3639. doi:10.22399/ijcesen.4675.
2. Marquis B, Opota O, Jaton K, Greub G. Impact of Different SARS-CoV-2 Assays on Laboratory Turnaround Time. J Med Microbiol. 2021;70(5):001280. doi:10.1099/jmm.0.001280.
3. Núñez I, Belaunzarán-Zamudio PF, Caro-Vega Y. Result Turnaround Time of RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 is the Main Cause of COVID-19 Diagnostic Delay: A Country-Wide Observational Study of Mexico and Colombia. Rev Invest Clin. 2022;74(2):071-080. doi:10.24875/ric.21000542.
4. Naveen KG, Ahmad S, Kumar P, Mahto M, Bharti S. Turnaround Time of Laboratory Investigations and Factors Responsible for Delays in a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in Eastern India: A Cross-Sectional Study. Cureus. 2026;18(1):e100703. doi:10.7759/cureus.100703.
5. Dawande PP, Wankhade RS, Akhtar FI, Noman O. Turnaround Time: An Efficacy Measure for Medical Laboratories. Cureus. 2022;14(9):e28824. doi:10.7759/cureus.28824.
6. Kumar KR, Mufti SS, Sarathy V, Hazarika D, Naik R. An Update on Advances in COVID-19 Laboratory Diagnosis and Testing Guidelines in India. Front Public Health. 2021;9:568603. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.568603.
7. Abraham P, Aggarwal N, Babu GR, Barani S, Bhargava B, Bhatnagar T, et al. Laboratory surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in India: Performance of testing & descriptive epidemiology of detected COVID-19, January 22 - April 30, 2020. Indian J Med Res. 2020;151(5):424-437. doi:10.4103/ijmr.ijmr_1896_20.
8. Gupta N, Potdar V, Praharaj I, Giri S, Sakpal G, Yadav P, et al. Laboratory preparedness for SARS-CoV-2 testing in India: Harnessing a network of Virus Research & Diagnostic Laboratories. Indian J Med Res. 2020;151(2-3):216-225. doi:10.4103/ijmr.ijmr_594_20.
9. Lee S, Yoon S, Lee W, Chun S, Min W. Strategies to shorten turnaround time in outpatient laboratory. J Clin Lab Anal. 2022;36(10):e24665. doi:10.1002/jcla.24665.
10. Cherie N, Berta DM, Tamir M, Yiheyis Z, Angelo AA, Tarekegn AM, et al. Improving laboratory turnaround times in clinical settings: A systematic review of the impact of lean methodology application. PLoS One. 2024;19(10):e0312033. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0312033.
11. Clare T, Twohig KA, O'Connell AM, Dabrera G. Timeliness and completeness of laboratory-based surveillance of COVID-19 cases in England. Public Health. 2021;194:163-166. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2021.03.012.
12. Dakhave M, Gadekar S, Malekar A, Wankhede G. 'CoviSwiftTM': A point-of-care RT-PCR device for SARS-CoV-2 and its variant detection. J Virol Methods. 2023;315:114714. doi:10.1016/j.jviromet.2023.114714.
13. Garneret P, Coz E, Martin E, Manuguerra J, Brient-Litzler E, Enouf V, et al. Performing point-of-care molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 with RNA extraction and isothermal amplification. PLoS One. 2021;16(1):e0243712. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0243712.
14. Shetty O, Gurav M, Bapat P, Karnik N, Pai T, Wagh G, et al. COVID 19 pandemic testing time – Crisis or opportunity in disguise for India? Semin Oncol. 2021;48(2):152-155. doi:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2020.12.001.
15. Côté FL, Lahrichi N, Gralla E, Bakker H, Krishnakumari PK, Gromicho J, et al. Within-laboratory SARS-CoV-2 real time PCR testing operations in Nepal: a simulation-based analysis. Lancet Reg Health Southeast Asia. 2025;36:100584. doi:10.1016/j.lansea.2025.100584.
16. Tan RY, Wong B, Lim R, Lee CL, Tan J, Tan KB, et al. Factors associated with delayed diagnosis of symptomatic adult COVID-19 cases presenting to primary care: a population-wide study during transition from Delta to Omicron BA.1 in Singapore. Lancet Reg Health West Pac. 2023;41:100919. doi:10.1016/j.lanwpc.2023.100919.
17. Torres I, Sippy R, Sacoto F. Assessing critical gaps in COVID-19 testing capacity: the case of delayed results in Ecuador. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):637. doi:10.1186/s12889-021-10715-x.
18. Nanayakkara L, Pettigrew TR, Overton J, Ryan PL, Pawar AK, Midson HM, et al. Reduction in cycle time for a rapid polymerase chain reaction diagnostic test at the point of care. J Infect Prev. 2023;24(1):23-29. doi:10.1177/17571774221148072.
19. Lou AH, Elnenaei MO, Sadek I, Thompson S, Crocker BD, Nassar BA. Multiple pre- and post-analytical lean approaches to the improvement of the laboratory turnaround time in a large core laboratory. Clin Biochem. 2017;50(15):864-869. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2017.04.019.
20. Novak A, Gnatowski A, Sucha P. Urgent samples in clinical laboratories: stochastic batching to minimize patient turnaround time. Health Care Manag Sci. 2026;29(2):16. doi:10.1007/s10729-026-09756-8.
21. Chan YC, Mukherjee A, Moretti N, Nakaoka M, Merino J, Rosun Z, et al. A process simulation model for a histopathology laboratory. In: WSC'24: Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference. IEEE press; 2025:846-857. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3712729.3712799
22. Tran KT, Nguyen KD, Nguyen TN, Pham LT, Nguyen LM, Nguyen PH, et al. The role, challenges, and solutions of laboratories in disaster medicine: a systematic review. Front Public Health. 2026;13:1726280. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2025.1726280.
23. Dhibika M, Madhusudhan NS, Malini A, Natarajan M. Comparison of Manual and Automated Nucleic Acid (RNA) Extraction Methods for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by qRT-PCR. Cureus. 2023;15(3):e36773. doi:10.7759/cureus.36773.
24. Colton H, Parker MD, Stirrup O, Blackstone J, Loose M, McClure CP, et al. Factors affecting turnaround time of SARS-CoV-2 sequencing for inpatient infection prevention and control decision making: analysis of data from the COG-UK HOCI study. J Hosp Infect. 2023;131:34-42. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2022.09.022.
25. Alajmi A, Adlan N, Lahyani R. Assessment of Supply Chain Management Resilience within Saudi Medical Laboratories during Covid-19 Pandemic. Procedia CIRP. 2021;103:32-36. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2021.10.004.
26. Inbanathan FY, Wijesinghe PR, Naidoo D, Buddha N, Salvador EC, Le KK, et al. Assessment of public health laboratory preparedness and response in WHO South-East Asia region during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learned and future directions. Lancet Reg Health Southeast Asia. 2024;31:100496. doi:10.1016/j.lansea.2024.100496.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mohit Sunil Wadhi, Sangita Prashant Bansode, Uddhav P. Khilare
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html).
How to Cite
