How would you preserve sample identity across laboratory instrument integrations?

Short answer

Keep sample identity stable across accessioning, aliquoting, instrument acquisition, interpretation and result release using controlled identifiers, explicit mapping tables and auditable exception handling.

Why

Start with a unique accession identifier and define when new child identifiers are required for aliquots or derived materials. When a sample is loaded onto an instrument, capture the device identifier, plate or rack position, instrument run ID and a controlled mapping to the LIMS record. Validate both outbound worklists and inbound result files.

If an instrument provides an unexpected ID, quarantine the data instead of guessing a patient or tube. Track operators, software versions, collection and processing timestamps, sample state and any authorised relabelling. Use uniqueness and state-transition checks to prevent a result being released for the wrong or already disposed sample.

Where regulated data are involved, ensure records remain attributable and reconstructable, with access and audit-trail controls proportionate to risk. Successful transport of a result file is not proof of identity integrity.

Common mistakes

Using a free-text sample name as the only cross-system key and resolving mismatches manually without a trace

The interviewer might ask next

How would you model a pooled sample and its constituent source tubes without losing ancestry?