Mmmm. Good thoughts.
I used to work in Australia for a region transport service. They designed, built and maintained their own neontal systems inhouse as there was nothing on the market that met their weight + Gforce requirements. It was a very expensive and very long process that consumed a lot of resources.
The benefit was that they got a bespoke system that met their requirements. The power supply was very clever, able to prioritise and divert charging current to the various components to ensure that the max current draw was never exceeded. It would run off mains, DC and even Quantas! Even had a USB socket to charge your phone :o)
The downside was that the lead time was measured in years, and it is a process that they could only afford to go through as an organisation once a decade.
In comparison we were able to purchase 4 trolleys almost off the shelf and have the systems up and running in a matter of a few months. The downside is that they weight too much, they are not crash tested as whole systems and their design allows for no vibration damping. It's all a compromise.
I know a UK service that tried to design their own system, but even though they wanted 4 trolleys they would have had to order about 8 and would have lost 4 to destructive crash testing. It just wasn't cost effective within their budget.
I understand that there are already draft European standards for transport incubators which specify a weight and crash resistance parameters. Unfortunately we are not going to be able to meet these requirements unless we start considering the systems as a whole. The only system in the UK that passes at present is the paraid aeromedical trolley.
Joe O. Moseti, Senior Clinical Engineering Technologist at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust is currently doing a national survey of neonatal transport systems, which will be interesting.
Lets keep thinking ... i might work on the spec in my downtime!
Thanks
Ian Braithwaite
Senior Transport Nurse
EMBRACE, Yorkshire
