Home Articles Downloads Forum Products Services EBME Expo Contact
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 4 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10
#20350 12/11/02 1:41 PM
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 797
Likes: 1
KM Offline
Philosopher
Offline
Philosopher
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 797
Likes: 1
AAH THE ART OF BUCK PASSING.
LONG LIVE PERSONAL OPINION.
rolleyes

#20351 12/11/02 2:13 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
??????????????

#20352 12/11/02 2:14 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 499
Sage
Offline
Sage
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 499
Now that one has got off ones soapbox, Jill, my female co-functional, may Louis remind you that it is not “Book Passing” if you where to take your broken toaster back to the shop where you bought it would empty the crumb tray first or just take it back? would you clean it even if you where sending someone else on your behalf?
Jill my fellow hombre, surely it is common courtesy to hand the goods back in a clean and safe condition is it not. This should be foremost the responsibility of the user. There are probably many “delegated helpers” as your self inserted into the equation, but the buck has to end with the USER. My friend, it is that simple.

Louis shocked


No trees were harmed in the posting of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
كيف الآن يحمّر البقرة
#20353 12/11/02 5:44 PM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,913
Likes: 23
Hero
Offline
Hero
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,913
Likes: 23
Jill
I think that using properly trained cleaners is a good way to free up valuable nursing time, especially if it gets the job done.

Is anyone using equipment cleaners?

We still ask the user to get the equipment cleaned after each patient.
We don't mind if the nurse cleans it or whether someone else cleans it, but they do clean it.

Most wards are quite good at signing our form, but sometimes fail to read it. We do get equipment back with a cleaned notice attached, which has not even seen a damp cloth. If this happens we speak to the staff and point out the error. It is usually the night staffs fault (according to the day staff) but they do then clean the equipment.


Be Proactive and reactive.
#20354 12/11/02 7:30 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Louis and John,

I think you might be trying to teach Grandma to suck eggs (no offence Gill) you know - and Mark E's lollipop comment really takes the biscuit (no pun intended!). With Gill's valuable input I watched a busy, regional NICU develop into one of the best around, with respect to equipment usage, equipment training, clinical-support, clinical data management and maintenance.

She does also take the time to train those more intellectually-challenged like myself, which is unusual in departments where everybody is watching their backs and paranoid about others job-roles, qualifications, grades and knowledge. By the way, I think hers is the sort of approach that those who aim to be "Proactive, not reactive" and others who give "formal" training to users (hah, hah) should be aiming for.

Finally, Dave H. what does it matter if everyone you work with is well qualified? Why bother about other's qualifications at all as long as they meet the minimum criteria? Paranoia maybe? Concerned about slipping further down the food-chain into the primordial-sludge, perhaps?

#20355 13/11/02 9:35 AM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,913
Likes: 23
Hero
Offline
Hero
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,913
Likes: 23
Richard,
From the tone of your posting I think you have mis-interpreted the posting. confused
I was being sincere when I said equipment cleaners could free up valuable nursing time.
At our Trust I regularly see too few nurses trying to care for too many patients, and I have the uptmost respect for the work they do, and vice-versa. You could speak to any nurse in our Trust and they would agree.

I agree with Jill. smile

We are trying to find funding for cleaners who will only clean equipment. The tissue viability nurse has take the lead in this initiative, as it seems to be the ripple mattresses that are the main item we have problems with.

I can't speak for Mark.E , but I read his comments as complimentary, and I didn't take it as being sarcastic at all.

Sometimes written text loses the 'tone' and can be read to mean different things, which is why I tend to use the instant graemlins, to give more tone/meaning to the text. cool


Be Proactive and reactive.
#20356 13/11/02 10:50 AM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 391
Sage
Offline
Sage
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 391
Firstly may I endorse what John has said, I didn't take his comments as flippant and neither did I interpret Mark.E's comment as sarcastic.

I think Jill's comments were valuable and she obviously is dedicated and "proactive" in her approach, from what I can interpret, from her postings. wink

Now on to you Richard mad

Firstly I can't "interpret" from your profile who you are.
I post details so as to give other readers an idea as to who I am and what my background is.

Your status gives the impression of a caller to a daytime chat show i.e. "Richard from Essex"
It is your right but if you want to fire some bullets why not take off your Zorro mask. confused

Do I have a problem with people being well qualified?

Absolutely not, What I have a problem with is people "chasing" qualifications for qualifications sake, wether that be in nursing or engineering, a view point my erstwhile colleague Mr Mundy has eluded to in the past.

A minimum criteria of qualifications?

Again no, an adequate level of qualifications, or training for that matter. Does having a degree make for a better nurse? My experience of nurses doesn't show that. What it does,I think, is start the ball rolling to "fast tracking" people out of the profession they originally joined to become one of the hordes of professional managers.

Paranoia?

Most definitely. I've always been paranoid, as I always subscribe to most conspiracy theories too, but working in the NHS for so long gives you that too.
Is my paranoia due to the cleanliness of equipment or the state of nursing attainment, I think not dear Richard, am I being sarcastic..your darn tootin' laugh

"Slipping down the food chain into the primordial-sludge"
Such articulation! Do you mean am I worried I'm being left behind and resigned to the scrapheap?
I have no fear of this, either as an individual or as a profession.

I believe the work we are doing is of uttmost importance and greatly valued.

All comments to do with cleaning/contamination is meant as a topic for debate to improve standards.

Blame culture does exist as does "passing the buck".

Hopefully through communication we can improve this. On a local level we are geared up to do this with dialogue between ourselves, nursing staff, clinical staff, management, infection control and lots of other interested groups.

However nationally it's a bit more difficult to do, which is why this forum is a good place to "air" thoughts and viewpoints.

People and places do different aspects of healthcare provision in vastly diverse ways.

I for one, read this forum, and take the good and bad points out of all postings.
Some I will think of as good ideas and progress them here, others I won't and will store in the memory banks.

I don't profess to have all the answers, I am opinionated as you may have guessed. I'm also big enough to accept criticsm when deserved.
Don't think it is here, but I may be wrong. rolleyes


Why worry, Be happy!
#20357 13/11/02 12:03 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Actually, John, Louis and Mark E. The way I read your postings it seems that you assumed Jill was a Nursey-type. Graemlins or not, that's the way it came across to me and it will have to others.

With this almost patronising attitude, I know Jill's entitled to be a mit miffed. I think I would be - but hey, why worry be happy!

Dave. H. there was no need to bring nurses or other engineers qualifications into it - nothing to do with anyone else, in my opinion, unless you're in a position to decide for someone else (i.e. you're a Chief Technician).

As for being a Zorro; Richard is my real name, my email is there and if you or anyone else wants a private discussion you're welcome.

It shouldn't really worry you what my qualifications are or where I work but it's in a large General Hospital. I am a fully-qualified engineer with over 14 years in the NHS and a spell working for a private company, whose name escapes me! Mark E. will fill you in if you want to know anything else.

No doubt you'd prefer to have a bunch of idiots, who count on their fingers, working for you so you can keep hold of them once you've got 'em, Eh? Of course, you could be of the "I've got no interest in that so nobody else should have opportunities", way of thinking, perhaps? But maybe I've misinterpreted your posting above.

#20358 13/11/02 1:55 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 391
Sage
Offline
Sage
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 391
Richard

I think you have mis-interpreted my previous posting.

I brought up about qualifications because in Jill's last posting she stated "students are taught at degree level" when referring to nurse training.
I assumed by this that this meant that these trained nurses are not taught about equipment care
but lesser trained nurses are eek

I never assumed Jill was a "Nursey-type" I assumed she was a Clinical Technologist as her profile states!
I can't therefore see what gives you the right to assume that this is what John,Louis or Mark.E assumed.
Or indeed what gives you a right to say that that would be the case with others.

Indeed if Jill is "miffed" over the presumption that you have said was "patronising" then I'm sure she can respond.

Do you take yourself as the "Alastair Campbell" to Jill's "Tony Blair". rolleyes

As for patronising, isn't the "kettle calling the pot black" true here. frown

As for my interest in your qualifications, I think you have mis-interpreted, I have no interest in your academic or vocational background.
My slant on qualifications was the "appropriate level for the job" pitch, as mentioned in other subjects previously.

As to your assumption that we employ "a bunch of idiots who have difficulty in counting" I am deeply disturbed that you think to question their integrity or skill in this way.

My colleagues are well qualified, to degree level in some cases for the record, I am not.
They are well experienced and trained and choose to work here because they probably enjoy it and consider themselves to be doing a worthwhile job.

I don't employ them, the Trust does.
I have no fears of them moving on, they will take that decision if and when it suits them.
I would take every effort to help them if this was their desired course of career development.

Several of the staff are also doing extra qualifications from technical to business management courses.
This is actively encouraged and procedures are put in place to benefit them during their period of study.

These are personal choices and I applaud them in their desire to acheive greater success, wherever this may take them.

They are however all sufficiently qualified to fulfill the posts they hold and my argument is that these "extra" qualifications will and should benefit them in their chosen career future progression, not in their current situation to which their structure is already formalised and planned.

I don't "keep hold" of staff, they stay for their own reasons, it has never been my way of thinking of keeping people down.

Indeed if you knew me you would know that nothing could be further from the truth.

I have worked in places where these regimes take place of keeping people down and paying them accordingly. I ,sir, am an egalitarian and consider it as one of my duties to be "proactive" in helping our staff progress both academically and financially.

Wether you think I'm jealous of these people or not is immaterial as you suggested that because I may "..have no interest in that.." are my reasons.
I hope the above points have clarified your misconception, I do have concerns as to qualification and job suitability but not in the areas you suggest.

It is also not an "us and them" thing.
What I believe in is relevant to all fields/disciplines whatever their area of expertise.

My areas of concern relate more to things like Agenda for Change, NHS Modernisation and Professional Accreditation.
If you want to see an example of "finger pointing", and "jockeying" for position just look at the common pay spine. frown

Hope this is of some clarification Richard and I hope this doesn't cloud the initial of the original point. wink


Why worry, Be happy!
#20359 13/11/02 2:36 PM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,913
Likes: 23
Hero
Offline
Hero
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,913
Likes: 23
Richard,
I know that Jill is a Clinical Technologist from Kent & Canterbury Hospital East Kent NHS Trust
with interests in Neonatology, and I agree with her that less qualified staff are perfectly capable of cleaning equipment, if that is part of their job description.

It is also a fact that (Nurses/ODA's/Doctors) The users are responsible for ensuring equipment is clean (even if they assign someone else to do it), this reduces the risk of cross infection.

I mentioned nurses because it was part of the discussion, nurses were mentioned in many of the previous posts. I try to concentrate of the facts, and not make too many assumptions.

DB9801 states that "a failure to have effective procedures in place will not only put staff and end users of equipment at risk, but also create a danger of liability being incurred"

We are all resposible for ensuring patient safety, that includes keeping equipment clean. If that means asking for a signed document to say the device has been cleaned then we should do it.

It needs a culture change, not just from users, but from everyone.

I am not being argumentative, We do enforce our decontamination policy, Our EBME Librarian will not move equipment without a contamination status notice.


Be Proactive and reactive.
Page 4 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10

Moderated by  DaveC in Oz, RoJo 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 52 guests, and 18 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Daniel Rothwell, tomandjogh, Pascachristi, bme2020, drleiva
9,974 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums25
Topics10,858
Posts72,863
Members9,974
Most Online5,980
Jan 29th, 2020
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5