It’s a question I ask daily; how are you currently managing your QC data? 

The last check before test results reach a client is the approval stage. Where test results are formally reported on a certificate of analysis, approval is authenticated by signature. So, what does that signature mean? And what should Lab Managers review before they sign the dotted line?

Many laboratories have yet to make the leap from paper to electronic records such as LIMS.  There are usually valid reasons for holding back and maintaining the paper-based system of the dark ages.  These reasons tend to be things like “we don’t have the budget”, “we don’t have time to implement a system”, “our lab isn’t big enough to use a system like that” or “why fix what isn’t broken”.  While these are all suitable reasons for maintaining a paper-based system, 

Assessing your LIMS supplier is a necessary process for laboratories operating in a regulated industry, but it is also considered, in general, good practice.  The supplier assessment should be scaled appropriate to the risk, complexity of your LIMS, and the services provided.  The assessment is most useful

Laboratories look to gain ISO 17025 accreditation as recognition of their competence and abilities, to help them improve and monitor their operational processes, and to satisfy customer requirements. At the end of 2017, an update to the ISO 17025 standard was issued. In this blog, we give you

Audit trails are a common LIMS feature required for regulated laboratories, but they are generally a useful tool for any laboratory – regulated or not. For those of you who are new to LIMS,

When you’re working in a fast-paced environment such as a laboratory, you might not have the time to implement improved ways of working.  You may be using an existing LIMS, and are used to the workarounds and quirks of the system. 

Many laboratories introduce LIMS to help with sample data management and reporting.   Some labs will have used the same system for 12 years without upgrades, and other labs will