EBME Forums Forums Management Professional Issues Agenda For Change Voluntary Register ?

How many Hospitals, ask it the Service Engineer who is in to service their equipment
a/ have any relavent qualifications
b/ are on the Voluntary Register (or similar)

or is it just taken on trust that the company service engineer is compitent?

That would be a bit discourteous, I would have thought (especially as we are living in times when people do not even consider it important to run messages through a spelling checker)!

Anyway, these days all that seems to matter is whether such people as service engineers are covered by liability insurance. Whether a guy can actually do useful work is beside the point, apparently – just as long as senior butts are covered, as it were.

At the moment there is no regulation or a requirement to be registered so I don't suppose anybody has the right to question manufacturers representatives competence unless there's evidence to the contrary and the individuals asking are in a responsible position, employed to oversee the contracts, etc. The customer has rights to a certain level of service if they're paying for it I suppose but I don't think this extends to challenging individuals directly unless they're blatently flouting H&S or good practice in plain view.

Hopefully regulation would allow the protected job title to at least give an indication that an individual has 'jumped through the hoops' and is maintaining competences, etc, via CPD. Thus evidence is there if an individual is challenged. Otherwise, without documentary evidence of assessment/competences, it is more difficult to prove competence, move between jobs, or to develop within a career in the NHS.

It's the employer, in this case the NHS, in conjunction with the HPC through IPEM, IIE and ART, etc, that will require employees performing certain roles, with a protected job title, to be registered I think. It's not really got anything to do with individuals as such (in the same way as it's nothing to do with me what my colleagues rate of pay is).

I think that regulation should extend to 3rd party concerns that take on in-house NHS services but I doubt the NHS will try to regulate manufacturers or 3rd parties in practice. The requirement would have to be written into service-level contracts, etc, etc, and it would cost extra no doubt.

If regulation comes into being I doubt maunufacturers will be required to employ individuals who're registered but registered employees will probably drift-in from the NHS and be able to use the protected titles. It's probable that the more reputable companies will ensure that at least some of their employees are registered.

As far as the state regulation of our trade is concerned i would assume that this will also require that all individuals employed by OEMS and the like who carry out work deemed to be the same level of risk as the individual employed within the NHS will need registration. Otherwise there seems little reason for NHS employees being registered.
If you look at the way the CS register has gone there is a requirement that anyone employed to carry out work from a certain level is a SRCS. Whats the difference between them and us? I would argue we (NHS) are more likely to be directly involved in a live situation with a patient than a Scientist (as peecentage of the trade) I would also argue that serivce engineers are an even higher risk as they are out on the road working to tighter time factors and worse conditions (travel etc)than NHS techs.

Is it not just the name that is registered? So if they call themselves "Company Engineer" or "Service Technician" or anything other that "Clinical Technologist" then they do not have to be registered. It is then up to us to decide whether we let a person loose on our kit.
Robert

what does registration really prove? that your registered with ipem, iqa etc. but does not reflect your physical ability to carry out work eg, repair etc.
it will justify that you have gained qualification and that they are measured against the likes of ipem, etc.

i believe ISO 9001:2000, has a evaluation section. this is where your employer, mainly oem will see you carry out your work to the book. or that your can demonsrate the training you undertook is being put into practice.

manni

Rojo

You are correct, registered healthcare professions have the right to use legally protected titles such as Clinical Scientist or Technologist. Call yourself something else and you don't need to be registered.

This is the point I have made many times in other threads. The HPC will only prosecute you if you unlawfully use a title it protects.

KM,

I agree. In my opinion regulation may work against us if it is not applied consistently across the board in NHS medical/clincial engineering. If it isn't applied rigorously then employers in the NHS may try to circumvent a weak system of regulation by choosing the cheapest options with regard to creating registered or non-registered posts in EBME, particularly. Training and career prospects associated with regulation may be patchy and limited to the larger Medical Physics Departments. This could mean difficulties for non-registered ex-EBME engineers moving between jobs in particular.

In fact a worse situation to what exists now, for some, except the manufacturers and 3rd party agents will be placed in an even stronger position if they do not have to comply to the same standards of regulation that NHS may have to. In general medical equipment maintenance, working in EBME, individuals only see a limited aspect of the C.S. profession, if at all. If you worked, or visited, a large Medical Physics department providing Clinical Imaging, Clinical Engineeering, Radiotherapy, Radiation Protection, etc, etc you would see that regulation is important for individuals in that profession.

You have to consider the consequences of failing to deliver correct therapeutic doses, failure to diagnose life-threatening diseases and ability to cause injuries through incompetence in R&D. I think regulation should be about ensuring a competent workforce, that can demonstrate this, consisting of individuals that are accountable for their actions. However, considering C.S. employed in maintenance, I agree with your point about there being little difference, on the face of it, between what C.S. in general maintenance do and what Engineers do - except the C.S. is usually employed in a responsible position as a manager of course.

Bioman, Rojo,

What you say is true but take the example of Clinical Scientists - it's the employer that creates the job roles and the job-titles. Thus if the employer chooses to apply regulation rigorously then by appointing only registered employees to fill posts with protected titles (the employer creates the job-title) the employer can influence how well the regulation works in practice. This is how it is working for Clinical Scientists, nationally, I believe.

There are very few posts that I see advertised in the NHS that allow individuals to perform similar roles to registered professionals, with protected titles, without actually requiring them to be employed using the protected titles. otherwise the system setup within the NHS can be circumvented from within (Shouldn't the Trades Unions and the HPC have a role in preventing this?).

What we require is that, if regulation is applied, the HPC ensures that the NHS employs only registered individuals with protected job-titles to ensure the quality of the NHS Clinical Technologist workforce. The HPC, NHS, Medical Physics and EBME should also try to influence outside agents that perform similar roles to use protected job titles if their employees work in similar roles with the ability to do harm.

Richard,
I agree totally, if the real point of registration is to protect patients from undesirable people, such as incompetant "technologists", then it must apply across the board to all who have hands on the equipment.
Robert