An engineer sits at your front desk and your reporting bench - not on a call. Working demo by day 7, in your lab by week 3, a measured TAT-compliance number by week 8. Built on your test panels, your referrers, your SLAs - not a template.
TAT is the one number every lab feels daily, and 88% of Indian labs already track it, on a register nobody watches. The delay isn't the machine: it's the sample sitting un-received, the result keyed but un-verified, the report signed but never sent. This board is the spine of the whole OS: every barcode scan that powers it also powers report delivery, referrer attribution, and inventory.
At AIIMS Patna, across 201,552 samples, the median TAT was 278 minutes and ~74% of it was pre- and post-analytical - registration, transport, verification, delivery. A Delhi non-profit found 18% of report delays were simply "the sample was not received" - a pure tracking failure - and cut delay from 16% to under 3% once they could see it.
Each test panel carries its configured TAT SLA. As a sample is scanned Registered → Collected → Received → Run → Verified → Delivered, its clock counts down. Approaching breach flips amber; breached flips red and pings the lab in-charge on WhatsApp before the doctor calls. A "sample not received" alarm fires when an expected sample hasn't been scanned-in within its window.
Manual report typing is a real risk - post-analytical (typographical) errors are 65% of all reporting errors in a 10-year NABL audit. And patients walk back in to find reports not ready, swamping the front desk with the same three status calls. We auto-build the report from result entry (reference ranges + abnormal flags applied, killing transcription), and the moment the pathologist signs, fire a WhatsApp utility-template with the encrypted PDF - to the patient and the referrer, in their language.
A real Pune-style pathology chain ran referral arrangements "in personal notebooks" - month-end reconciliation took 2-3 days and still triggered disputes with the biggest referrers; add-on tests ordered mid-collection "vanished" before the invoice. Every accession is tagged to a referrer at registration; the system keeps a per-referrer ledger on their rate card, auto-computes commission daily (add-ons included), and flags unbilled tests before day-end. One-tap WhatsApp the monthly statement.
| Referrer | Tests | Gross ₹ | Commission ₹ | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apollo ClinicKoramangala · 12% | 214 | 3,28,400 | 39,408 | ₹39,408 due |
| Dr. R. MehtaGP · ₹/test card | 96 | 1,12,750 | 14,400 | paid 02/06 |
| Aundh Collection CtrB2B · 18% rate | 438 | 5,91,200 | 1,06,416 | ₹1,06,416 due |
| Dr. S. IyerEndo · 10% | 61 | 84,300 | 8,430 | paid 05/06 |
| 4 partners | 809 | ₹11,16,650 | ₹1,68,654 | ₹1,45,824 due |
Small labs track reagents on Excel or by feel - two costed failures: expired-reagent wastage, and unexpected stockouts that stall tests and feed the TAT board red. We hold batch-level stock with lot + expiry capture, suggest FEFO picks, auto-deduct when a test reports, and fire low-stock / expiry alerts on WhatsApp with a reorder suggestion. The lot/expiry log doubles as NABL evidence.
A lab is a trust business. So here are the four places we'd refuse to oversell in your week-one demo - each is a real constraint, and saying so up front is the point.
A 6-month dental check-up recall is the same machine as a 6-month HbA1c recall: same cadence logic, same WhatsApp opt-in/STOP plumbing, same SME owner running the front desk on a register. 60-70% of patients never return for their next test, and a reminder cadence lifted repeat-test conversion 27% → 46% at a Chennai chain. For labs, this is asset reuse - not a fresh build - which is exactly why we can ship a working recall queue in week one.
You've read one problem in full and seen three more. These are the next ones we hear most from labs in Pune, Indore and Nashik - each a real ask with a real number behind it, not a capability padding the page.
One-pass patient + panel entry, auto accession ID, printed barcode per tube, scan-to-accept. A mandatory-field gate kills the 74-94% incomplete-requisition problem at source.
Enter control values → auto Levey-Jennings + Westgard flags, block release if QC fails, two-level authorisation, one-click assessor report (TAT %, rejection %, redo %).
The Dental OS engine, retargeted: patients due this week by panel, one-tap WhatsApp reminder with a "book home collection" link, conversion tracker. 27%→46% proven.
Auto-assign phlebotomist by zone, cluster appointments, sequence a route, patient ETA on WhatsApp, barcode-at-the-door collection that feeds the TAT board the instant blood is drawn.
B2B-credit + partial-payment tracking, WhatsApp payment links, an outstanding-dues dashboard by patient / referrer / centre - feeding the same ledger as commissions.
For the lab + N collection centres: branch-tagged volume, revenue, TAT % and dues in one consolidated view, single sign-on, role-based access - replacing the spreadsheet that holds the chain together.
We won't blur the line, because in a trust business blurring it once poisons everything. So here it is, first-class: what's live today, and what's a concept we built to show our reasoning before you've signed a thing.
A full healthcare-clinic operational stack - appointments, records, billing and the WhatsApp recall engine the lab page reuses ~1:1 - plus a Machine Monitor running on a 20-year-old factory floor. Real users, real clinics, today.
The live TAT dashboard, the sample-to-report flow, the referrer ledger, the FEFO inventory - concepts, and we'd rather say so. The fact that we can spec your lab this precisely before signing is the point: it's our opening move, not our ceiling.
This page shows the TAT board and three more. Your lab has its own worst one - a referrer dispute, a NABL audit you keep deferring, a STAT panel that's always late. Bring it. We'll have a working demo in seven days.