As with clinical laboratories, worker shortage is affecting large retail pharmacy chains and independent pharmacies alike
Staffing shortages in clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups caused by the Great Resignation is having a similar impact on retail pharmacy chains. Consequently, pharmacy chains are reducing store hours and even closing sites, according to USA Today.
As Dark Daily covered in “Clinical Laboratories Suffer During the ‘Great Resignation,” the US Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that from August 2021 through December 2021, the healthcare and social assistance workforce saw nearly 2.8 million workers quit—an average of 551,000 people during each of those months. By comparison, in December 2020, 419,000 healthcare workers left their jobs.
Pharmacies now report similar shortages in qualified workers, partly due to the sharp decrease in revenue from COVID-19 vaccinations, but also due to worker burnout. Both developments have counterparts in clinical laboratories as well.
“I’m concerned that without the help from the COVID-19 vaccinations that everyone needed, these pharmacies that were able to tough it out for another year or two might not be able to continue,” B. Douglas Hoey, PharmD, CEO of the National Community Pharmacists Association (NCPA), told USA Today. Clinical laboratories that processed large numbers of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics have experienced the same sudden drop in revenue causing similar difficulties maintaining staffing levels. (Photo copyright: Cardinal Health.)
Staffing Shortages Leading to Safety Concerns
According to the Washington Post’s coverage of a study conducted in 2021 of 6,400 pharmacists in various retail and hospital environments, a majority did not feel they could conduct their jobs efficiently or safely.
“75% of the pharmacists in [the] survey disagreed with the statement ‘Sufficient time is allocated for me to safely perform patient care/clinical duties.’”
“71% said there were not enough pharmacists working to ‘meet patient care/clinical duties.’”
“65% said ‘payment for pharmacy services’ did not support their ‘ability to meet clinical and non-clinical duties.’”
“Workplace conditions have pushed many pharmacists and pharmacy teams to the brink of despair,” said the board of trustees of the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) in a press release, the Washington Post reported. “Pharmacy burnout is a significant patient safety issue. It is impacting patients today with delayed prescription fulfillment, unacceptable waits for vaccines and testing, and potential errors due to high volume, long hours, and pressure to meet performance metrics.”
This is a sentiment that has been repeated across every facet of healthcare—including in clinical laboratories—where staff shortages are being felt.
Shortage of Pharmacists or Lack of Morale?
In “Drugstores Make Slow Headway on Staffing Problems,” the Associated Press outlined from where it believes the staffing problems originate. “There isn’t a shortage of pharmacists. There’s just a shortage of pharmacists who want to work in those high-stress environments that aren’t adequately resourced,” Richard Dang, PharmD, Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacy at the University of Southern California (USC), told the Associated Press.
“The pressure never let up. No matter how mind-numbing and repetitive the work could get, we had to work with constant vigilance, as there was absolutely no room for error,” Bator wrote.
“We techs were left unsupported and unmentored throughout the pandemic,” she continued. “No one cared if we were learning or growing in our job, and there was little encouragement for us to enter training or residency programs. We were just expendable foot soldiers: this is not a policy that leads to long-term job retention.”
Healthcare workers feeling burnt out and under-appreciated during the pandemic led to mass resignations that produced staffing shortages throughout the industry. It appears this trend has caught up to pharmacies as well.
Workforce Wasn’t Ready
Local and chain pharmacies played an important role in the COVID-19 pandemic. Pharmacists distributed COVID-19 tests and treatment to their communities. But for many it was a struggle to keep up.
Stefanie Ferreri, PharmD, Distinguished Professor in Pharmacy Practice and Chair of the Division of Practice Advancement and Clinical Education at University of North Carolina’s Eshelman School of Pharmacy, told the Associated Press that she felt the expanding role of pharmacies in public health was “awesome” but stated that “the workforce wasn’t quite ready” for what took place during the pandemic.
Much like Bator recounted in her essay, pharmacy workers suddenly had new responsibilities, longer working hours, and little room for error.
“There are multiple stories about pharmacists just getting overwhelmed. The stress level and burnout is high,” Dima M. Qato, PharmD, PhD, told USA Today. Qato is Hygeia Centennial Chair and Associate Professor (with tenure) in the Titus Family Department of Clinical Pharmacy at the University of Southern California. “So, pharmacists leave, and stores have to shorten” their hours, she added.
Scheduling and Patience Can Help
What can be done to soften some of the issues staff shortages are causing? Ferreri suggests that pharmacies set appointment times for regular customers so that a pharmacist’s workload can be more predictable. An appointment system can ease stress for both the pharmacist and patient. Ferreri advises customers to be patient when it comes to their prescriptions. She suggests patients give pharmacies more than a day’s notice for refills.
“I think on both sides of the counter, we need to all have grace and realize this is a very challenging and stressful time for everyone,” said Brigid Groves, PharmD, Vice President, Pharmacy Practice at the American Pharmacists Association.
With burnout, staff shortages, and stress affecting nearly every aspect of the healthcare industry, having patience with each other will go a long way to helping clinical laboratories, pharmacies, and patients navigate the road ahead.
Encouraging patients—even children—to be more directly involved in their own medical care may reduce the burden on healthcare workers and might even help those clinical laboratories struggling to hire enough phlebotomists to collect specimens
Researchers at Emory University School of Medicine have concluded a study which found that school-aged children can successfully use a nasal swab to obtain their own SARS-CoV-2 test specimens. This may come as a surprise to hospital and clinical laboratory personnel who have performed nasal swabbing for COVID-19 tests. Some people, adults included, find the procedure so uncomfortable it brings tears.
And yet, after being shown a 90-second how-to video and given a handout with written instructions and pictures, 197 Atlanta children who had COVID-19 symptoms between July and August of 2021 performed their own self-swabbing. A healthcare worker then collected a second swabbed sample. All samples were submitted to a clinical laboratory for PCR analysis.
The Emory study provides another example of how the healthcare system is engaging patients to be directly involved in their own medical care. Results of the study could positively impact clinical laboratories facing a shortage of personnel, as well as schools where children have to take repeated COVID-19 tests with the assistance of trained professionals.
In a study with 197 school-age children, researchers at Emory University School of Medicine found that children could self-swab themselves for COVID-19 testing after watching a 90-second instructional video. Clinical laboratory leaders who are short on personnel may find these results intriguing. (Photo copyright: Emory University.)
How Did the Children Do?
The self-collected swabs and those collected by a healthcare worker agreed 97.8% of the time for a positive result and 98.1% of the time for a negative result. The analysis showed that both collection methods identified the 44% of symptomatic kids who were positive for COVID-19.
“Seeing how closely the results line up between the children and trained healthcare workers is a strong indicator that these age groups are fully capable of swabbing themselves if given proper instruction,” said Jesse Waggoner, MD, an Assistant Professor of Infectious Diseases with the Emory University School of Medicine and one of the lead authors on the study, in an Emory University press release.
A higher percentage of children age eight and under needed assistance, such as more instruction before correctly completing self-collection—21.8% compared to 6.1% for children older—but SARS-CoV-2 detection among the two age groups did not differ.
Does FDA Approve of Self-Swabbing?
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not authorized COVID-19 tests that include self-swabbing by children under age 14. However, data from the Emory study, published in JAMA, is now available to test manufacturers seeking authorization for pediatric self-collection.
“Pediatric self-swabbing will support expanded testing access and should make it even easier to test school age populations with fewer resources,” said Tim Stenzel, MD, PhD, Director of the Office of In Vitro Diagnostics at the FDA, in the Emory statement. “This study furthers our knowledge of test accuracy with these types of samples and provides test manufacturers with data to support their EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) requests to the FDA.”
Self-swabbing versus Clinical Laboratory Worker
While it has been longstanding medical practice to have healthcare workers collect samples for respiratory tract infection testing, the Emory researchers suggest that allowing children to collect their own COVID-19 samples could be one way to reduce the burden of a shortage of healthcare workers.
The researchers also believe pediatric self-swabbing would expand access to diagnostic tests and make it easier to test school-age populations.
“Every minute of a healthcare worker’s time is at a premium,” said senior study author Wilbur Lam, MD, Professor of Pediatrics and Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Tech, in a National Institutes of Health (NIH) press release. “Why not allow a kid to self-swab? It’s a win-win! They would rather do it themselves and it frees up the healthcare worker to do other things,” he added.
In 2020, a Stanford University School of Medicine study published in JAMA showed test samples collected by adults who swabbed their own nasal passages were as accurate as those collected by healthcare workers. This study involved 30 participants who had previously tested positive for COVID-19.
Though the Emory University and Stamford University studies were small, they agreed in their findings which is significant. Clinical laboratory executives and pathologists should expect this trend toward direct-to-consumer and other forms of self-testing to continue, even among young patients.
Factors contributing to shortage of med techs and other lab scientists include limited training programs in clinical laboratory science, pay disparity, and staff retention, notes infectious disease specialist Judy Stone, MD
Staff shortages are a growing challenge for medical laboratories, and now the problem has grabbed the attention of a major media outlet.
In a story she penned for Forbes, titled, “We’re Facing a Critical Shortage of Medical Laboratory Professionals,” senior contributor and infectious disease specialist Judy Stone, MD, wrote, “Behind the scenes at every hospital are indispensable medical laboratory professionals. They performed an estimated 13 billion laboratory tests in the United States each year before COVID. Since the pandemic began, they have also conducted almost 997 million diagnostic tests for COVID-19. The accuracy and timeliness of lab tests are critically important, as they shape approximately two-thirds of all medical decisions made by physicians.”
Though Stone states in her Forbes article that clinical laboratories in both the US and Canada are facing staff shortages, she notes that the problem is more acute in the US.
As Dark Daily reported in February, the so-called “Great Resignation” caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has had a severe impact on clinical laboratory staffs, creating shortages of pathologists as well as of medical technologists, medical laboratory technicians, and other lab scientists who are vital to the nation’s network of clinical laboratories.
In her analysis, however, Stone accurately observes that the problem pre-dates the pandemic. For examples she cites two surveys conducted in 2018 by the American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP):
Many pathologists and clinical laboratory managers would agree that Stone is right. Dark Daily has repeatedly reported on growing staff shortages at clinical laboratories worldwide.
And in “Lab Staffing Shortages Reaching Dire Levels,” Dark Daily’s sister publication, The Dark Report, noted that CAP Today had characterized the current lab staffing shortage as going “from simmer to rolling boil” and that demand for medical technologists and other certified laboratory scientists far exceeds the supply. Consequently, many labs now use overtime and temp workers to handle daily testing, a strategy that has led to staff burnout and more turnover.
“There is a critical shortage of medical laboratory professionals in the US, and in Canada to a lesser extent,” wrote infectious disease specialist Judy Stone, MD (above), in an article she penned for Forbes. “Here [in the US],” she added, “we are 20-25,000 short on staff, with only 337,800 practicing. That is roughly one medical laboratory scientist per 1,000 people.” Clinical laboratories are well aware of the problem. A solution to solve it and return labs to former staffing levels is proving elusive. (Photo copyright: Forbes.)
Why the Shortfall?
In her Forbes article, Stone notes the following as factors behind the shortages:
Decline in training programs. “There are only [approximately] 240 medical laboratory technician and scientist training programs in the US, a 7% drop from 2000,” Stone wrote, adding that some states have no training programs at all. She notes that lab technicians must have a two-year associate degree while it takes an average of five years of post-secondary education to obtain a lab science degree.
Pay disparities. Citing data from the ASCP, Stone wrote that “medical lab professionals are paid 40%-60% less than nurses, physical therapists, or pharmacists.” Moreover, given the high cost of training, “many don’t feel the salary is worth the high investment,” she added.
Staff retention. In the ASCP’s 2018 job satisfaction survey, 85.3% of respondents reported burnout from their jobs, 36.5% cited problems with inadequate staffing, and nearly that many complained that workloads were too high.
Inconsistent licensing requirements. These requirements “are different from state to state,” Stone wrote. For example, the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) notes that 11 states plus Puerto Rico mandate licensure of laboratory personnel whereas others do not. Each of those states has specific licensing requirements, and while most offer reciprocity for other state licenses, “California [for example] does not recognize any certification or any other state license.”
In a 2018 report, “Addressing the Clinical Laboratory Workforce Shortage,” the ASCLS cited other factors contributing to the shortages, including retirement of aging personnel and increased demand for lab services.
Possible Solutions
Stone suggested the following remedies:
Improve working conditions. “We need to reduce the stress and workload of the lab professionals before we reach a greater crisis,” Stone wrote.
Standardize state certification. This will facilitate “mobility of staff and flexibility in responding to needs,” Stone suggested.
Improve education and training opportunities. The ASCLS has called for clinical lab science to be included in the Title VII health professions program, which provides funding for healthcare training. Rodney Rohde, PhD, a clinical laboratory science professor at Texas State University, “also suggests outreach to middle and high school STEM programs, to familiarize students early with career opportunities in the medical laboratory profession,” Stone wrote.
Recruit foreign workers. Stone suggested this as an interim solution, with programs to help them acclimate to practice standards in the US.
It will likely take multiple solutions like these to address the Great Resignation and bring the nation’s clinical laboratory staffing levels back to full. In the meantime, across the nation, a majority of clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups operate short-staffed and use overtime and temporary workers as a partial answer to their staffing requirements.
Critical shortages in medical laboratory workers and supplies are yet to be offset by new applicants and improved supply chains. But there is cause for hope.
Medical laboratory scientists (aka, medical technologists) can be hard to find and retain under normal circumstances. During the current coronavirus pandemic, that’s becoming even more challenging. As demand for COVID-19 tests increases, clinical laboratories need more technologists and lab scientists with certifications, skills, and experience to perform these complex assays. But how can lab managers find, attract, and retain them?
The Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center reports that as of mid-October more than one million tests for SARS-CoV-2 were being performed daily in the US. And as flu season approaches, the pandemic appears to be intensifying. However, supply of lab technologists remains severely constrained, as it has been for a long time.
Still, qualified medical technologists (MT) and clinical laboratory scientists (CLS) are hard to find.
Demand for COVID Tests Exceeds Available Clinical Lab Applicants
“I can replace hardware and I can manage not having enough reagents, but I can’t easily replace a qualified [medical] technologist,” said David Grenache, PhD, Chief Scientific Officer at TriCore Reference Laboratories, Albuquerque, N.M., in the WSJ.
Another area where demand outstrips supply is California. Megan Crumpler, PhD, Laboratory Director, Orange County Public Health Laboratory, told the WSJ, “We are constantly scrambling for personnel, and right now we don’t have a good feel about being able to fill these vacancies, because we know there’s not a pool of applicants.”
Are Reductions in Academic Programs Responsible for Lack of Available Lab Workers?
Recent data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show 337,800 clinical laboratory technologists and technicians employed by hospitals, public health, and commercial labs, with Job Outlook (projected percent change in employment) growing at 7% from 2019 to 2029. This, according to the BLS’ Occupational Outlook Handbook on Clinical Laboratory Technologists and Technicians, is “faster than average.”
“The average growth rate for all occupations is 4%,” the BLS notes.
Medical laboratories have the most staff vacancies in phlebotomy (13%) and the least openings in point-of-care (4%), according to an American Society for Clinical Pathology 2018 Vacancy Survey published in the American Journal of Clinical Pathology (AJCP).
Becker’s Hospital Review reported that “Labor shortages in [clinical] testing labs have existed for years due to factors including low recruitment, an aging workforce, and relatively low pay for [medical] lab technicians and technologists compared to that of other healthcare workers with similar education requirements.
“In 2019, the median annual salary for clinical laboratory technologists and technicians was $53,000, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The skills required for lab workers also are often specialized and not easily transferred from other fields.”
At the “root” of the problem, according to an article in Medical Technology Schools, is a decrease in available academic programs. Laboratory technologists require a Bachelor of Science (BS) degree and technicians need an associate degree or post-secondary certificate.
“(The programs) are expensive to offer, so when it comes to cuts and budgets, some of those cuts have been based on how much it costs to run them. That, and they may not have high enough enrollments,” said Lisa Cremeans, MMDS, CLS(NCA), MLS(ASCP), Clinical Assistant Professor at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, in the Medical Technology Schools article. (Photo copyright: University of North Carolina.)
AACC has called for federal funding of these programs, which now number 608, down from 720 programs for medical laboratory scientists in 1990.
“The pandemic has shone a spotlight on how crucial testing is to patient care. It also has revealed the weak points in our country’s [clinical laboratory] testing infrastructure, such as the fact that the US has allowed the number of laboratory training programs to diminish for years now,” said Grenache, who is also AACC President, in a news release.
Creative Staffing Strategies Clinical Labs Can Take Now
select “apply code” and complete the registration.
How Some Clinical Labs are Coping with Staff and Recruitment Challenges
The Arizona Chamber Business News reported that Sonora Quest Laboratories in Tempe earlier this year launched “Operation Catapult” to help with a 60,000 COVID-19 test increase in daily test orders. The strategy involved hiring 215 employees and securing tests with the help of partners:
Meanwhile, students in the UMass Lowell (UML) medical laboratory science (MLS) program, see brighter skies ahead.
“The job outlook even before COVID-19 was so amazing,” said Dannalee Watson, a UML MLS student, in a news release. “It’s like you’re figuring out a puzzle with your patient. Then, we help the doctor make decisions.”
Such enthusiasm is refreshing and reassuring. In the end, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the resultant demand for clinical laboratory testing may call more students’ attention to careers in medical laboratories and actually help to solve the lab technologist/technician shortage. We can hope.
