Provider and patient dissatisfaction from inability to give accurate status on send‑out tests
Definition
When a client or clinician calls about a send‑out test and the lab cannot immediately see where the specimen is or what step it is in, staff must manually investigate, leading to delays in communication and perceived poor service. Large reference labs emphasize that precise tracking allows them to identify exactly which bench and technician has a tube, supporting rapid response to client inquiries and superior customer experience.[2][3][7]
Key Findings
- Financial Impact: Hard-dollar loss via lost outreach business can reach hundreds of thousands per year for regional labs if dissatisfied clients move their send‑outs to competing reference labs; soft costs include high call volumes and rework.
- Frequency: Daily
- Root Cause: No unified specimen journey view spanning client site, internal lab, and external reference lab; lack of barcoded or RFID tracking at each move; and no customer-facing portals providing real‑time send‑out status, forcing phone-based escalation.[1][2][3]
Why This Matters
This pain point represents a significant opportunity for B2B solutions targeting Medical and Diagnostic Laboratories.
Affected Stakeholders
Ordering physicians, Nurses and clinic staff, Lab client services representatives, Outreach program managers, Patients waiting on critical diagnostic results
Deep Analysis (Premium)
Financial Impact
$100,000–$300,000 per year in lost and at-risk outreach revenue from physician practices moving send-outs to competitors with better visibility, plus soft costs of 0.25–0.5 FTE LIS/admin time consumed by manual tracking support and rework. • $100,000–$500,000 per year in lost or delayed reimbursement on high-cost send-out tests, plus administrative overhead for appeals and risk of future utilization management restrictions. • $100k+ annual loss from CROs moving volume to better-tracked competitors
Current Workarounds
Billing manager manually reconciles LIS data, courier manifests, and reference lab reports in Excel to build case lists and timelines; relies on email chains and staff recollection to answer status or invoicing disputes from public health agencies. • Coordinator manually checks courier logs and calls drivers for location • LIS admin and client services maintain employer-specific spreadsheets and manually update specimen statuses based on daily downloads from reference labs and courier manifests; they field frequent phone/email inquiries from HR and safety officers and manually look up cases in multiple portals.
Get Solutions for This Problem
Full report with actionable solutions
- Solutions for this specific pain
- Solutions for all 15 industry pains
- Where to find first clients
- Pricing & launch costs
Methodology & Sources
Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.
Evidence Sources:
- https://news.mayocliniclabs.com/2025/02/19/the-specimens-journey-to-the-laboratory-refined-processes-superior-quality-unwavering-care/
- https://keystonelab.com/uncategorized/lab-test-tracking-for-healthcare-providers/
- https://www.novopath.com/resources/blog/specimen-tracking-and-laboratory-information-systems/
Related Business Risks
Lost charge capture for send‑out tests due to poor tracking and order/result mismatches
Excess courier, shipping, and labor costs from inefficient send‑out specimen tracking
Lost, misrouted, or compromised send‑out specimens leading to redraws and repeat testing
Delayed billing and extended AR from slow send‑out status visibility
Technologist and coordinator time wasted searching for and reconciling send‑out specimens
Chain-of-custody and traceability deficiencies risking CLIA/ISO nonconformities for send‑outs
Request Deep Analysis
🇺🇸 Be first to access this market's intelligence