Realities of Using Drones to Transport Laboratory Samples: Insights from Attended Routes in a Mixed-Methods Study

Figures & data

Figure 1 The National Hospital, Ulleval Hospital, Radium Hospital, Aker Hospital, and the Blood Bank in the Red Cross house.

Figure 2 The reconfiguration pathway of the MLP theory translated into a healthcare concept, adapted from Geels FW, Schot J. Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res Policy. 2007;36(3):399–417 Copyright 2007, with permission from Elsevier.⁵⁵

Table 1 Route Description

Routes	Collected Payload	Approx. Total Length/Day
Ulleval University Hospital, the National Hospital, and Aker University Hospital	Biological material and other goods between 07:30 and 14:30. Transported in bags, Styrofoam boxes, or envelopes. Envelopes are also used for mail between the hospitals.	80 km
Ulleval University Hospital, the National Hospital, and Red Cross	Five trips to the National Hospital. Blood is transported in suitcases, transport bags, or Styrofoam boxes. Mail between the hospitals is transported in a laptop bag.	86 km
Radium Hospital, Aker University Hospital, Ulleval University Hospital, and the National Hospital	Pathologic samples between 08:00 and 16:00. Samples are transported in gray boxes. Mail for the other hospitals is in pink boxes.	124 km

Table 2 Categories That Emerged from the Transcripts

#	Category	Description	Findings	Consequences
1	Change and adjustments of routes	This theme describes changes to the routes and the degree to which the carriers believe they have the power to change and adjust the routes.	The routes have existed almost unchanged over a long time with only minor adjustments. Change is typically initiated top-down. The hospital divisions and laboratories are the gatekeepers of change.	We thus observe that making changes to routes is difficult to accomplish.
2	Customer perspective	The carriers have a service function with respect to the laboratories. This theme describes how the carriers perceive and represent their roles.	The service offering depends on the carriers’ attitude and familiarity with the locations. In addition to the transport of samples, the carriers help to place samples, and supply empty racks and containers. They help transport mail, fabrics, garbage, medical equipment, and medicine.	Lack of incentives and influential force to change the system may lead the carriers to become rather passive service workers, ie, not actively trying to change the system.
3	Service Structure	The service structure looked at conditions of how the service is organized today.	Constant delays when picking up samples, because the carriers are asked to wait a few minutes until the samples are ready for transport. The carriers follow a schedule with fixed times, which includes additional time for waiting.	In relation to drones, the delays may be problematic because drones fly according to scheduled times. One carrier pointed out, “following the plan [routing] slavishly also means not being able to wait.”
4	Management of change	This theme describes who may be responsible for change and if carriers have areas where they can discuss and exchange ideas.	The carriers suggested that they should be involved in changing routes. Furthermore, the carriers wanted to have leaders who appreciate their meaning, as well as space to experiment and try out new things.	The carriers indicated that greater involvement would result in their being more motivated and satisfied at work. Furthermore, the carriers may have no space for exchanging their concerns or ideas about how to improve the current system.
5	Threats and support by drones	This theme deals with anxiety about possible job loss and how carriers think drones could support their work.	The carriers assessed the use of drones for transport purposes as a threat, because for them drones had been talked about as a replacement for their service offering. However, the carriers also argued that drones could support their work.	The carriers are afraid of being sacrificed for efficiency goals or private companies that overtake the transport. The carriers are convinced that although technology may replace some work, there will always be a need for a backup. Furthermore, they do not believe that drones can replace them in meeting the transport needs to which they cater with “road vehicles” today. Different sizes, weights, and established routines that are difficult to change were mentioned as reasons. However, the carriers are open to using drone support. One carrier argued, “Carriers plus drones can complement each other”, while another added, “All of the carriers have additional routes they could give to a drone to make it easier for themselves.” Another suggested, “Drones may replace ‘road vehicles’ for all the taxi trips that the laboratory orders.”
6	Miscellaneous	This theme describes the miscellaneous observations that were made while accompanying the carriers.	Transport boxes are not standardized and varying in size and material. Furthermore, carriage issues, such as leaked formol may be dangerous for drone flights.	Transport solutions are not suited for transportation by drone.

Table 3 Summary of the Most Relevant Questions in the Questionnaire

Category	Scale	Variable
Threats
Are you concerned that your work might disappear or that you might lose work because of technological development?	Yes/No	5/11 (31/69%)
Are you optimistic that technology can improve your work in the future? Pessimistic—Optimistic	Scale 1–5	3.00 (SD 1.36)
Initiating
Do you think a future drone-based transportation of biological material (blood samples, biopsies, other material) is realistic?	Yes/No/Do not know	9/2/5 (56/13/31%)
Do you think your hospital will use drones in the future?	Yes/No/Do not know	9/1/6 (56/6/38%)
Involvement
Does your leader support innovative ideas?	Yes/No	1/15 (6/94%)
Do you have an arena to discuss and/or test innovative ideas in your unit?	Yes/No	2/14 (13/87%)
Are your leaders active in planning for future change?	Yes/No	0/16 (0/100%)
Are you involved in the planning for future change?	Yes/No	1/15 (6/94%)

Table 4 Driving, Loading, and Optimized Times

Existing Routes	Average Driving Time	Average Loading Time	Maximum Loading Time	Minimum Loading Time	Mean Total Transport Time	Loading Time as % of Total Transport Time
UL-AK-RH-UL	40,2	33,6	48,0	25,0	73,8	46%
UL-RA-RH-AK-UL	44,4	43,7	83,0	21,0	88,1	50%
UL-RA-RH-RA-UL	63,0	30,7	43,0	23,0	93,7	33%
UL-RA-RH-UL	39,0	68,0	82,0	55,0	107,0	64%
UL-RH-AK-UL	22,3	24,8	42,0	7,0	47,0	53%
UL-RH-RK-UL	39,0	39,3	45,0	35,0	78,3	50%
UL-RH-UL	19,3	17,5	46,0	8,0	36,7	48%
UL-RK-UL	27,3	28,4	44,0	16,0	55,7	51%
Average All	30,0	27,8	83,0	7,0	57,9	48%

Notes: All times in minutes.

Abbreviations: UL, Ulleval Hospital; AK, Aker Hospital; RH, the National Hospital; RA, Radium Hospital.

Table 5 Current and Direct Route

	Route	Ulleval-Aker (4 Legs)	Radium-Aker (3–4 Legs)
Current Route (Multiple Legs)	Mean driving time	44.3	43.0
	Maximum driving time	59.0	52.0
	Minimum driving time	35.0	35.0
	Mean loading time	23.9	40.2
	Maximum loading time	67.0	83.0
	Minimum loading time	10.0	16.0
	Mean total transport time	68.2	83.2
	Maximum total transport time	126.0	135.0
	Minimum total transport time	45.0	51.0
Direct Route	Mean Driving Time	14.0	28.0
	Maximum driving time	16.0	40.0
	Minimum driving time	11.0	18.0
	Minimum loading time	10.0	8.0
	Mean Total Transport Time	24.0	36.0
	Time Saved	44.2	47.2

Notes: All times in minutes.

Figure 3 Total transport times in existing and direct routes.

Geels FW, Schot J. Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res Policy. 2007;36(3):399–417. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.003

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar