John,
There is one thing for sure: there is a manufacturer for every medical device out there - devices that will, hopefully, have passed acceptance checks. Acceptance checks that involve a process that is supported by the relevant documentation i.e. a PPQ that requests information on equipment servicing, test equipment, operators manuals and options for servicing arrangements. This is so that informed decisions can be made at this stage in the life-cycle of an equipment type or model as to how best to maintain the equipment.
All equipment needs some form of maintenance despite some individuals' views on modern equipment never going faulty so if no service literature, advice or servicing information is forthcoming then perhaps the equipment should not be allowed into service or continue to be in service, for any appreciable time, without sourcing information from the manufacturer, vendor, agent or, in very rare circumstances, taking the risk assessment approach with advice from management and "experts" at the highest-level possible in the organisation.
However much NHS " Engineering Professionals" or "Experts" dislike it; the manufacturer is best placed to provide the relevant servicing literature and advice since they have the expertise and knowledge to manufacture, test and service the device. Medical equipment manufacturers are obliged to give the relevant information to competent individuals such as ourselves, so that we can perform maintenance at the convenience of our employer, to save money, or whatever - not to cut corners by ignoring what we think's appropriate to ignore.
There is not really an excuse for letting equipment out into use that has no servicing literature available for it, with no intention of following the manufacturers recommendations or to take measures that the manufacturer discourages. In my view it is ludicrous to insist, on one hand, that the information concerning servicing is provided by the manufacturer for a third party organisation to be able to service a medical device and then allow in-house NHS departments, such as ourselves, to apply our own methods of maintenance.
This attitude to servicing further encourages the "postcode lottery" in the standard and quality in servicing of equipment across the NHS - groups of individuals deciding to "go it alone" by making decisions that are not recommended and potentially flawed. It's the patients, staff and the reputations of the employer, manufacturer and engineer that will be compromised.
If this approach is applied logically then there is nothing to prevent any group of "expert" individuals, who may think themselves competent and above existing standards, guidelines, recommendations and standing instructions from their employers, from deciding to service anything that they fancy using any method they see fit. I wonder if some individuals have actually read MHRA, NHS, Manufacturers and all the other stuff that's out there and what CNST, Controls Assurance and Quality Standards are all about? Stuff and nonsense perhaps but guidelines and policy of our employer no-less; maybe it's better to use it where applicable than to make it up as we go along though.
