Volume 40 Number 4 | August 2026
Summary
The author reflects on the critical role of medical laboratory technologists in patient advocacy through ensuring accurate test results, effective communication with healthcare teams, and upholding professional standards to protect patient safety. She emphasizes that advocacy occurs both at individual and systemic levels in healthcare settings.
Eleanor Guhl, MLT(ASCP)CM, ASCLS Developing Professionals Forum Chair
As a new professional and a bench technologist, I often ask myself what role I play in patient advocacy. It’s hard to feel connected to our patients when we aren’t the ones having face-to-face conversations, offering reassurance, or telling them they’re going home soon. But that distance does not take away from the quality of care we provide from behind the scenes.
I think all professions in healthcare, including our own, underestimate how much we advocate for and care about the patients we serve. There are so many small moments throughout the day where we make educated, yet difficult, decisions that directly affect patient outcomes. It’s through these moments and conversations that we can change perceptions of our role and strengthen our profession.
Our entire job is built around ensuring patients receive results that accurately reflect their condition, and that responsibility carries weight. It would be easy to let an erroneous result pass if it meant avoiding a phone call or skipping a rerun on another instrument. But we advocate for our patients every time we pause, question, and investigate. We advocate when we facilitate open communication with the care team, explaining why a clotted or hemolyzed sample can drastically impact patient care. It’s through these conversations and decisions that we put patients first, despite time pressures and frustrations.
“Specimen rejection is often seen as routine, but communication with other specialties is one of the most critical forms of patient advocacy we have.”
Recently, I had the opportunity to facilitate a case study at my local college with both nursing and medical laboratory technician students in their final semester. Together, we reviewed a situation where a patient received the incorrect blood type and ultimately passed away. The specimen had sat in the patient’s room for over 10 hours, and two out of the three nursing groups asked whether the blood would be “coagulated” at that point. The MLT students and I exchanged quick smiles, but that moment stayed with me. Not because the question was wrong, but because it highlighted a gap in understanding that can directly impact patient safety. That gap reinforces the divide between disciplines and, in some cases, can lead to dangerous assumptions. Specimen rejection is often seen as routine, but communication with other specialties is one of the most critical forms of patient advocacy we have.
For example, while reviewing a blood smear and noticing clots along the feathered edge, I feel that familiar wave of anxiety. The patient is two years old, and even though I wasn’t there, I know that the draw was difficult; no child likes to be poked. As I focus in and out, doubt creeps in for just a moment:
There aren’t that many clumps.
Their platelet count is close to the last result.
The nurse isn’t going to be happy about this.
For a moment, it’s tempting to justify releasing the result, but this is where advocacy happens. In that pause, we make the difficult decision to prioritize the patient’s health over what’s easy. During my conversation with the care team, I had the opportunity to explain how clotting impacts platelet and white blood cell accuracy and why a redraw was necessary. It wasn’t the easiest choice, and it certainly wasn’t the most convenient, but it was the right one.
It’s easy to take the “Because I said so” approach to these delicate conversations. And the person on the other end may not be the most receptive. But taking the time to walk through these processes is how we as professionals can advocate every day. Advocacy for our profession is advocacy for our patients; one cannot exist without the other.
These everyday moments may seem small, but they are built on a strong foundation of education, training, and high professional standards that allow laboratorians to make these decisions with confidence. Our standards, though tedious, should serve as a shield to protect patient safety. Advocacy in the laboratory is not limited to individual actions; it is supported by the expectations we uphold as a profession.
Whether it’s recognizing gaps in understanding across the healthcare team or making difficult decisions at the bench, advocacy exists at both the system and individual level. It has helped me greatly to take a moment and identify these choices and situations, so I see them not as annoying setbacks, but as my way of saving lives. When we push for better training, stronger certification standards, and greater recognition of our profession, we are creating an environment that empowers laboratorians to make these critical decisions every day and ultimately protects the patients we serve.
Eleanor Guhl is a Clinical Laboratory Scientist at SSM Health, St. Mary’s in Madison, Wisconsin.