Conventional Methods, MALDI-TOF, and Automated ID–AST Platforms

Interpret a MALDI-TOF identification result by relating spectrum generation and database matching to confidence indicators and common causes of failed or misleading identification.

Trace the VITEK 2 workflow from suspension and card selection through kinetic optical readings to identification confidence and reported MIC results.

Trace the MicroScan WalkAway workflow from panel selection and inoculation through automated reading, identification, and broth microdilution MIC reporting.

Trace the BD Phoenix workflow from panel preparation and inoculation through growth detection, identification, and susceptibility reporting.

Evaluate automated AST performance using essential agreement, categorical agreement, minor error, major error, and very major error.

Construct a comparison that distinguishes the identification-only role of MALDI-TOF from the ID–AST capabilities of VITEK 2, MicroScan, and BD Phoenix, considering principles, turnaround time, workflow, strengths, and limitations.