JP2014062760A - Specimen automatic conveyance system performing allocation of specimen between plural analyzers capable of simultaneously measuring multi-item, and method thereof - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a specimen automatic conveyance system capable of efficiently performing allocation.SOLUTION: A specimen automatic conveyance system confirms a measurement item of a specimen, determines the processing capacity of an analyzer at that time for each of plural analyzers, and allocates the confirmed measurement item of the specimen to an analyzer according to the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time. For example, the processing capacity of an analyzer at that time is based on the number of accumulative correction measurements of the analyzer at that time.

Description

  The present invention relates to an automatic sample transport system and method for allocating samples among a plurality of analyzers capable of simultaneous measurement of multiple items.

  Clinical analyzers include immunological analyzers and biochemical analyzers. The immunoanalyzer detects by binding a labeled antibody to a substance causing an antigen-antibody reaction. The biochemical analyzer measures a contained component by reacting a reagent with a specimen such as blood or urine.

  The analyzer capable of measuring multiple items simultaneously is an analyzer that can simultaneously measure multiple items of immune responses and components. As such a multi-item simultaneous measurement analyzer, there is a fully automatic chemiluminescence immunoassay device ARCHITECT (registered trademark) system of Abbott (Non-patent Document 1).

  FIG. 1 shows an example of an analyzer that can measure multiple items simultaneously. The multi-item simultaneous measurement analyzer 100 generally includes a reagent storage 110 that stores reagents for a plurality of test items, a pipettor 120 that dispenses specimens and reagents, a reaction cell 130 that reacts specimens with reagents, and a reaction And a detector 140 for detecting the result. In the analyzer 100 capable of measuring multiple items simultaneously, when the reaction cell 130 rotates on the circumference, the pipetter 120 dispenses a sample or a reagent into the reaction cell 130 so that different items can be measured for each reaction cell. It is configured. This analyzer can be used alone, but a plurality of analyzers can be integrated into the system for further improvement of processing capacity. A system that automates sample transport in order to integrate a plurality of analyzers in this way is called a sample automatic transport system, or LAS (Laboratory Automation System).

  FIG. 2 shows an example of an automatic sample transport system. The automatic sample transport system 200 includes a sample input port 230 for inputting a container containing a sample to be analyzed, a sample output port 240 for discharging a container containing the analyzed sample, and at least one analyzer 210 from the sample input port. 220 and a transport lane 250 for transporting a container containing the sample to the sample discharge port.

  FIG. 3 is a plan view of the automatic sample transport system shown in FIG. A sample (hereinafter, a container containing a sample is also simply referred to as a sample) input to the sample input port 230 is automatically transferred to a desired analyzer according to the settings of the host computer of the sample automatic transfer system. More specifically, the automatic sample transport system reads the information of the sample flowing through the transport lane 250 with a barcode reader or the like on the branch path to each analyzer, determines whether there is a test request, It is configured to draw a sample toward the analyzer.

http://www.abbott.co.jp/medical/product/add1/architect.asp?r=1

  Unlike a multi-item automatic analyzer that is installed alone, there are many restrictions on the operation and control of a plurality of multi-item automatic analyzers connected to the LAS. On the other hand, it is difficult to perform detailed operations compared to a single analytical instrument. Many of the reasons are because there are many restrictions on the information obtained by communication from the analytical instrument. The most commonly adopted ASTM standard communication is a communication specification using RS232-C established in the first half of the 1990s. Communication between an analytical instrument, LIS (Lab Information System) and middleware is The amount of information that can be handled without problems by computers and communication networks of that era is limited. Later, with the advancement of computers and communication equipment, a foundation for communicating a large amount of information was established, but changing the analysis equipment and LIS communication standards and contents greatly increased development costs and user introduction costs, making major changes. Was kept off. In such an environment, when centrally managing devices connected to the LAS, it is necessary to give up detailed operations in exchange for automation of inspection.

  The main reason for the introduction of LAS is to cope with cost reduction by increasing work efficiency through automation. Certainly, automation has helped reduce costs, especially in the form of reduced labor costs in testing. However, on the other hand, loss of detailed operations as described above causes waste in reagents / consumables and control measurement, or the entire inspection system is stopped when equipment is maintained or troubles are dealt with. Further, there are cases where more time (personnel costs) is spent in comparison with a single device due to systemization.

  When connecting multiple multi-item automatic analyzers with the same processing capacity via LAS, increase the overall processing capacity by installing the same inspection items on all the devices, or avoid duplication of inspection items between analyzers. Increasing the total number of corresponding items is a common method. The reason for this is that the determination of the pull-in of the sample to the analytical instrument is performed based on the test items assigned to each analyzer registered on the system that controls the transport (mostly LIS), and the test is simply distributed. This is because it was decided. In other words, the same reagent item is installed in multiple analyzers, the sample requested for the corresponding item is drawn in as the corresponding analyzer block, and then the sample is simply allocated evenly for each analyzer (hereinafter referred to as “equal allocation method”). ”), Or by installing reagents by avoiding duplication of test items with multiple analyzers, unifying the processing destinations of the samples requested for the corresponding items, and allocating the samples in units of test items (hereinafter referred to as“ test items ”). It was called “Inspection Item Allocation Method”) and had to take logic. Even if these methods were developed, they were only combined logic methods of “inspection item allocation method” and “equal allocation method”.

  In addition, because communication with conventional analyzers cannot be performed by the host computer system (LIS) that manages transport and measurement requests, it is possible to control in advance the test items that can be measured by each analyzer. It is necessary to register on the system (LIS), and when equipment maintenance or trouble occurs, it is possible to take a backup immediately in the uniform allocation method, but in the inspection item allocation method, the registration information is updated. This also contributes to a decrease in operability.

  In terms of automation of specimen testing, the above-mentioned logic is sufficient, but it cannot be said that the ability of each analyzer is maximized. For example, in the equal allocation method with emphasis on processing capacity, a high effect can be obtained in terms of processing capacity and backup. On the other hand, even for inspection items with a low number of requests, test reagents can be duplicated on all analytical instruments and used for measurement. Preparation is required, and waste in reagent calibration and accuracy management occurs. In addition, in the test item allocation method, it is possible to minimize the waste in reagent calibration and accuracy control, but in terms of processing capacity and backup, it can be avoided by connecting an analytical instrument to the LAS more than necessary. Or, at the time of backup, it was necessary to stop the entire system and replace the inspection items. Furthermore, even in the complex logic method, the bias in the request contents of the sample to be measured directly leads to the bias in the test, and it was not possible to provide sufficient processing capacity stably.

  In addition, when a plurality of multi-item automatic analyzers having different processing capabilities are connected to the LAS, adopting the equal allocation method may lead to a decrease in processing capability due to a bottleneck. Even with multi-item automatic analyzers with the same processing capacity, there may be differences in processing capacity between inspection items, so adopting the equal allocation method to increase the overall processing capacity will reduce the inspection processing capacity due to bottlenecks. It can happen.

  Therefore, it is desirable to provide an automatic sample transport system that can realize a more efficient allocation method.

  According to one aspect of the present invention, an automatic sample transport system that allocates specimens among a plurality of analyzers capable of simultaneous measurement of multiple items includes means for confirming measurement items of specimens, and each of the plurality of analyzers. Means for determining the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time, and means for allocating the confirmed measurement items of the sample to the analyzer according to the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time.

  Also, according to one aspect of the present invention, the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time can be based on the cumulative correction measurement number of the analyzer at that time.

  Further, according to one aspect of the present invention, the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time can be the processing capacity of each measurement item of the analyzer at that time.

  Moreover, according to one aspect of the present invention, measurement items with a large number of requests can be installed redundantly on a plurality of analyzers.

  Moreover, according to one aspect of the present invention, the automatic sample transport system can further include means for managing measurement items and reagent erection information of each analyzer.

  The means for confirming the measurement item of the sample can be constituted by a computer device such as a barcode reader, an RFID reader reading device and / or a host computer of an automatic sample conveyance system, or a microprocessor of the reading device. The means for determining the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time can be configured by a computer device such as a host computer of an automatic sample transport system that communicates with the analyzer. Similarly, the means for managing the measurement items and reagent erection information of each analyzer can be configured by a computer device such as a host computer of an automatic sample transport system communicating with the analyzer. Such a host computer may be configured to be integrated into one computer, or may be configured to be distributed among a plurality of computers.

  According to one aspect of the present invention, a method for allocating specimens among a plurality of analyzers capable of simultaneous measurement of multiple items in an automated specimen transport system includes: confirming the measurement items of the specimen; and each of the plurality of analyzers. , Determining the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time, and allocating the measurement items of the confirmed sample to the analyzer according to the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time.

  Also, according to one aspect of the present invention, the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time can be based on the cumulative correction measurement number of the analyzer at that time.

  Further, according to one aspect of the present invention, the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time can be the processing capacity of each measurement item of the analyzer at that time.

  Further, according to one aspect of the present invention, when the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time is the same, the measurement item of the confirmed sample can be allocated to the predetermined analyzer.

  Further, according to one aspect of the present invention, a method for allocating specimens among a plurality of analyzers capable of simultaneous measurement of multiple items in an automated specimen transport system manages measurement items and reagent erection information of each analyzer. Can further be included.

  Confirmation of the measurement item of the sample can be performed by a computer device such as a barcode reader, an RFID reader reading device and / or a host computer of an automatic sample conveyance system, or a microprocessor of the reading device. Determination of the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time can be performed by a computer device such as a host computer of an automatic sample transport system communicating with the analyzer. Similarly, management of measurement items and reagent erection information of each analyzer can be performed by a computer device such as a host computer of an automatic sample transport system communicating with the analyzer. Such a host computer may be configured to be integrated into one computer, or may be configured to be distributed among a plurality of computers.

It is a top view for demonstrating the structure of the analyzer which can measure multiple items simultaneously. It is a perspective view for demonstrating the whole structure of a sample automatic conveyance system. It is a top view for demonstrating the whole structure of a sample automatic conveyance system. It is a flowchart for implement | achieving the load balance by the conventional equal dividing method. It is a flowchart for implement | achieving the load balance by the conventional inspection item allocation method. It is a flowchart for implement | achieving the load balance by the composite logic method of the conventional inspection item allocation method and the equal allocation method. It is a flowchart for implement | achieving the load balance by the allocation method of this invention. It is a figure for demonstrating the pros and cons of the conventional equal dividing method at the time of malfunctioning. It is a figure for demonstrating the pros and cons of the conventional inspection item allocation method at the time of malfunctioning. It is a figure for demonstrating the pros and cons of the composite logic method of the conventional inspection item allocation method and the equal allocation method at the time of malfunction. It is a figure for demonstrating the pros and cons of the allocation method of this invention at the time of malfunction.

  In the present invention, according to the processing capacity of each test item in the analyzer, the distribution of clinical specimens is leveled, and the analyzer and test items to be measured are subdivided and managed. As a result, the processing capacity of the analyzer connected to the LAS can be maximized and the number of test reagents installed for the test can be minimized, so that the test efficiency can be maximized.

  The basic logic is to connect analyzer A capable of processing 200 tests and analyzer B capable of processing 100 tests to the transport line in one hour that can process the same test. The goal is to equalize the inspection allocation to allocate twice the inspection. Similarly, when two analytical instruments having the same processing capacity are connected to the transport line, the samples or measurements are distributed so that the number of examinations is equalized. Furthermore, even when there is a difference in processing capability between inspection items, the inspection is leveled based on all information relating to these processing capabilities.

  Furthermore, by managing the analyzer capable of measuring each test item together with the reagent installation information through the HL 7, the measurement distribution that has been realized only in a single analyzer in the past can be further combined with the present invention. The entire analyzer connected to the LAS can be expanded, and the effect can be further enhanced.

  Reagents installed on each analyzer need only be installed on a plurality of analytical instruments only for inspection items with a high request frequency among the total number of inspections to be inspected. Therefore, it is possible to reduce duplication of inspection items with a low frequency of measurement requests. As a result, it is possible to reduce the waste of reagents while maintaining a high processing capacity of the entire test. In addition, the fact that the number of reagents installed in each analyzer can be reduced can further improve the efficiency of the inspection system with the transport connection of a small number of analyzers. Yes, the initial investment for constructing a clinical test system is suppressed, and the running cost is reduced.

  Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings, in comparison with the prior art. In the following description, a method for allocating a sample measurement between two analyzers will be mainly described. However, those skilled in the art will understand that the principle of the present invention is also applied to a method for allocating a sample measurement between three or more analyzers. You will understand that it applies. Throughout the drawings, the same components will be described with the same reference numerals.

  FIG. 4 is a flowchart for realizing load balancing by the conventional equal allocation method. This equal allocation method 400 is based on the premise that a plurality of analyzers are provided with the same reagent and all measurement items are the same.

  First, in step 402, sample information is read by a barcode reader or the like. In step 404, the measurement item of the specimen is confirmed from the read information. In step 406, it is confirmed whether the confirmed measurement item matches the measurement item of the two analyzers. If the measurement items of the two analyzers are met, it is checked in step 408 whether the previous allocation was the first of the two analyzers. If the current allocation is the first allocation or the previous allocation is not the first unit, in step 410, the current sample is allocated to the first unit. On the other hand, if the previous allocation was No. 1, the current sample is allocated to No. 2 in step 412. In step 406, if there are no test items that match the two analyzers, in step 414, the sample is not assigned to any of the two analyzers as not applicable.

  While this equal allocation method 400 is highly effective in terms of processing capacity and backup, it is necessary to prepare for the measurement by laying a test reagent redundantly on all analytical instruments even for test items with a low number of requests. In other words, waste of reagent calibration and accuracy management occurs. In addition, when a plurality of multi-item automatic analyzers having different processing capabilities are connected to the LAS, adopting the equal allocation method may lead to a decrease in processing capability due to a bottleneck. Even with multi-item automatic analyzers with the same processing capacity, there are cases where there is a difference in processing capacity between inspection items, so if you use the equal allocation method to increase the overall processing capacity, the inspection processing capacity will decrease due to bottlenecks. May happen.

  FIG. 5 is a flowchart for realizing load balance by the conventional inspection item allocation method. This inspection item allocation method 500 is based on the premise that the measurement items of a plurality of analyzers do not overlap.

  First, in step 502, sample information is read by a barcode reader or the like. In step 504, the measurement item of the specimen is confirmed from the read information. In step 506, it is confirmed whether the confirmed measurement item matches the measurement item of the first of the two analyzers. If the measurement item of the first unit is suitable, in step 508, the measurement item suitable for the sample is allocated to the first unit. Further, in step 510, it is confirmed whether or not the confirmed measurement item matches the measurement item of the second unit of the two analyzers. If the measurement item of the second unit is suitable, in step 512, the measurement item suitable for the sample is allocated to the second unit. If neither the measurement item of Unit 1 nor the measurement item of Unit 2 is matched, in Step 514, the sample is not allocated to either of the two analyzers as not applicable.

  In this inspection item allocation method 500, it is possible to minimize the waste in reagent calibration and accuracy management. However, in terms of processing capacity and backup, it can be avoided by connecting analytical instruments to the LAS more than necessary, or at the time of backup, the entire system is stopped and inspection items are replaced and inspection item registration information on the control system is changed. It is necessary to respond by updating.

  FIG. 6 is a flowchart for realizing load balance by the combined logic method of the conventional inspection item allocation method and the equal allocation method. This composite logic method 600 is based on the premise that measurement items of a plurality of analyzers are partially overlapped. In particular, by setting measurement items with a large number of requests to a plurality of analyzers, it is possible to improve processing capability and support backup.

  First, in step 602, sample information is read by a barcode reader or the like. In step 604, the measurement item of the sample is confirmed from the read information. In step 606, it is confirmed whether or not the confirmed measurement item matches the measurement item unique to the first of the two analyzers. If the measurement item specific to the first unit is matched, in step 608, the measurement item suitable for the specimen is allocated to the first unit. Furthermore, in step 610, it is confirmed whether the confirmed measurement item is suitable for the measurement item peculiar to Unit 2 out of the two analyzers. If the measurement items specific to the second machine are matched, in step 612, the measurement items suitable for the specimen are allocated to the second machine. If the measurement item unique to the second machine does not match, in step 614, it is confirmed whether or not the confirmed measurement item matches the measurement item common to the first and second machines. If the measurement items common to Units 1 and 2 are matched, in Step 616, it is confirmed whether the previous allocation of the common measurement items was Unit 1 of the two analyzers. If this is the first common measurement item allocation, or if the previous common measurement item allocation was not the first unit, in step 618, the common measurement item of the current sample is allocated to the first unit. On the other hand, when the previous allocation of the common measurement item is No. 1, in step 620, the common measurement item of the current sample is allocated to No. 2. If the confirmed measurement item does not match the measurement item common to Unit 1 and Unit 2 in Step 614, the measurement item that does not match the sample is assigned to any of the two analyzers as not applicable in Step 622. Absent.

  In this composite logic method 600, compared with the inspection item allocation method 500 of FIG. 5, although some waste occurs in reagent calibration and accuracy management, some measurement items of a plurality of analyzers are partially overlapped. In terms of backup, it is superior to the conventional inspection item allocation method, but it is not completely backed up.

  FIG. 7 is a flowchart for realizing load balancing by the allocation method of the present invention.

  First, in step 702, sample information is read by a barcode reader or the like. In step 704, the measurement item of the specimen is confirmed from the read information. In step 708, the cumulative correction measurement number of each unit at that time is confirmed. Here, the cumulative correction measurement number is obtained by dividing the cumulative measurement number of the analyzer by the processing capability of the analyzer. The throughput of the analyzer can be a measurable number per unit time. In step 708, it is confirmed whether the confirmed measurement item matches the measurement item of the analyzer having the smaller cumulative correction measurement number. If the measurement item of the analyzer having the smaller cumulative correction measurement number is suitable, in step 710, the measurement item suitable for the sample is allocated to the analyzer. Further, in step 712, it is confirmed whether the confirmed measurement item matches the measurement item of the other analyzer. If the measurement item of the other analyzer is suitable, in step 714, the measurement item suitable for the sample is assigned to the other analyzer for the remaining measurement items except for the measurement item assigned to the analyzer having the smaller cumulative correction measurement number. Allocate to If the measurement item of the other analyzer does not match, in step 716, the measurement item that does not match the sample is not allocated to either of the two analyzers as not applicable. In step 708, when the accumulated correction measurement number is the same, it may be assigned to the first machine or may be assigned to the second machine. Alternatively, when the number of accumulated correction measurements is the same, it may be alternately or randomly allocated to the first or second machine.

  In the allocation method 700 of the present invention, even if there is a difference in the processing capacity between the first machine and the second machine, the inspection items are allocated based on the cumulative correction measurement number, so that the inspection items according to the processing capacity of the first and second machines. Can be allocated. Further, in this inspection item allocation method 700, as in the case of FIG. 6, measurement items of a plurality of analyzers can be partially overlapped. In particular, by setting measurement items with a large number of requests to a plurality of analyzers, it is possible to improve processing capability and support backup.

  Next, we will compare each allocation method during normal operation and when trouble occurs. Table 1 is a comparison table of the allocation method during normal operation when the processing capacities of Unit 1 and Unit 2 are equivalent. Table 2 is a comparison table of the allocation method when the number of requests varies. Table 3 is a comparison table of the allocation method when item B of Unit 1 becomes defective.

  As can be seen from Table 1, during the normal operation, the measurement items are almost equally allocated to the two analyzers. However, with regard to the installation of reagents, in the uniform allocation method 400, all the reagents necessary for four types of measurement items must be installed in each analyzer.

  On the other hand, as shown in Table 2, when the number of requests varies in the normal operation, measurement deviation is observed in the inspection item allocation method and the composite logic method, but the measurement is measured in the uniform allocation method and the allocation method of the present invention. The bias is not recognized.

  Further, as shown in Table 3, when a failure occurs in item B of Unit 1, only the allocation method of the present invention allocates the measurement items to the two analyzers almost evenly. In this case, the equal allocation method 400 cannot be allocated evenly between the first machine and the second machine, so the first machine itself becomes unusable and the processing is continued only by the second machine. For this reason, all items are allocated to the second unit, and the throughput of the entire processing is lowered.

  Next, in the inspection item allocation method 500, since the item B is only the first unit, the measurement of the item B becomes impossible. The remaining items are processed by the first and second machines according to the inspection item allocation method 500. In the inspection item allocation method 600, even if a failure occurs in the item B of the first unit, the processing can be performed by the second unit, but the processing of the second unit increases and the overall throughput decreases. On the other hand, in the allocation method 700 of the present invention, even if a failure occurs in item B of Unit 1, processing can be performed by Unit 2, and the processing is evenly allocated between Unit 1 and Unit 2. Therefore, the overall processing throughput does not decrease.

  As described above, in the allocation method 700 of the present invention, the measurement items are allocated to the corresponding units without being greatly affected by the contents / order of the sample request items and the number of requests, so that the processing capability can be achieved even under a small reagent installation situation. Can be reduced. Further, even when the use of measurement items is restricted due to an analyzer failure or insufficient reagent remaining, it is possible to reduce a reduction in processing capacity.

  Next, with reference to FIGS. 8-11, the pros and cons of each allocation method when the defect of a measurement item generate | occur | produces are examined.

  FIG. 8 shows a case where item B of Unit 1 is defective. When the item B is defective, the uniform allocation method 400 cannot allocate the samples evenly to the two analyzers. Therefore, the first machine itself becomes unusable, and all processing is distributed to the second machine. For this reason, the throughput of the entire process is reduced.

  FIG. 9 shows a case where item B of Unit 1 is defective in the conventional inspection item allocation method 500. When the item B is defective, the test item allocation method 500 allocates the test items evenly instead of allocating the samples evenly to the two analyzers, so that the first machine itself can be used continuously. However, since item B is only the first unit, inspection of item B becomes impossible.

  FIG. 10 shows a case where item B of Unit 1 is defective in the conventional composite logic method 600. When the item B is defective, the test item allocation method 600 allocates the test items evenly, instead of allocating the samples evenly to the two analyzers, so that the first machine itself can be used continuously. Items common to Unit 1 and Unit 2 are allocated equally, but all items specific to Unit 2 are allocated to Unit 2. Therefore, if item B of Unit 1 becomes defective, processing concentrates on Unit 2. For this reason, the throughput of the entire process is reduced.

  FIG. 11 shows a case where item B of Unit 1 is defective in the allocation method 700 of the present invention. When item B is defective, the test item allocation method 600 does not allocate the samples evenly to the two analyzers, but allocates the test items evenly according to the processing capacity. It is. Since item B is in Unit 2, inspection of item B is performed. Since item allocation allocates inspection items according to the processing capacity at that time, even if item B of unit 1 becomes defective, processing does not concentrate on unit 2. Therefore, the throughput of the entire process is not reduced.

  Although the present invention has been specifically described above with reference to specific embodiments, the embodiments described herein are merely illustrative in view of the many possible embodiments to which the principles of the present invention can be applied. It is not intended to limit the scope of the invention. For example, in the above embodiment, the allocation method in the case where two analyzers are used has been described. However, it is obvious that the principle of the present invention can be applied to the case where three or more analyzers are used. In the above embodiment, the cumulative correction measurement number of the analyzer is used as the processing capacity of the analyzer at the time of allocation. However, other indicators may be used. For example, an indicator such as the processing capacity and processing capacity of the analyzer at the time of allocation may be used. Therefore, the configuration and details of the embodiment exemplified herein can be changed without departing from the spirit of the present invention. Further, the illustrative components and procedures may be changed, supplemented, or changed in order without departing from the spirit of the invention.

100 Analyzer capable of simultaneous measurement of multiple items 110 Reagent chamber 120 Pipetter 130 Reaction cell 140 Detector 200 Sample automatic transport system 210 Analyzer 220 Analyzer 230 Sample inlet 240 Sample outlet 250 Transport lane

Claims (10)

  An automatic sample transport system that allocates samples among multiple analyzers capable of simultaneous measurement of multiple items, including means for confirming sample measurement items, and for each of the multiple analyzers, A system comprising: means for determining processing capacity; and means for allocating the measurement items of the confirmed specimen to the analyzer according to the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time.   The system according to claim 1, wherein the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time is the processing capacity of each measurement item of the analyzer at that time.   3. The system according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the current processing capacity of the analyzer is based on the cumulative correction measurement number of the analyzer at that time.   The system according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein measurement items having a large number of requests are installed redundantly on a plurality of analyzers.   5. The system according to claim 1, further comprising means for managing measurement items and reagent erection information of each analyzer.   This is a method for allocating samples among multiple analyzers that can measure multiple items simultaneously in an automated sample transfer system. Confirmation of sample measurement items and analysis of each of the multiple analyzers at that time Determining the processing capacity of the analyzer, and allocating the confirmed measurement item of the specimen to the analyzer according to the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time.   The method according to claim 6, wherein the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time is the processing capacity of each measurement item of the analyzer at that time.   8. A method as claimed in claim 6 or 7, wherein the current throughput of the analyzer is based on the cumulative corrected measurement number of the analyzer at that time.   The method according to any one of claims 6 to 8, wherein if the processing capacity of the analyzer at that time is the same, the measurement item of the confirmed sample is allocated to a predetermined analyzer.   The method according to any one of claims 6 to 9, further comprising managing measurement items and reagent erection information of each analyzer.

Images