EBME Forums Forums Management Medical Equipment Management Recording of PPM results

On our PPM's we obtain a printout of the results for the equipment and follow the guidelines in the manuals. They should all have a daily monthly or annual test to be conducted. This is all attached to the job sheet that is filed. The database is then updated to say when the equipment was last seen and whether the equipment has had been calibrated or had its calibration checked.

There is the odd piece of equipment that gets a visual inspection and a tick to say it still exists but the manuals are used if available.

Its all about covering your arse if it comes to the court situation.

We normally save all the data in individual equipment files if using computer connected test equipment, but record pass/fail on the work sheet.

As per John, with the addition that we record exceptions (failures) & the rectification of same.

Does anyone heard of the Estates based equipment management software called Backtraq? Is there any EBME depts out that use it? More importantly does anyone use it to a satisfactory standard? We have been forced to use this system by our estates dept and we are having lots of problem due to the differences of how we wish to use it. Any comments would be helpful.

Ryan
So we are the only ones stuck with it then are we?
Another compromise instead of a tailor made product.

Ryan/Dicky
We are soon to be 'saddled' with a backtraq Pilot as part of the system to be installed in Estates.
This was not my own preferred option.

I have some reservations, based on past performance and support to this generic product, and it does not do all that we want nor work like we do at present.
That said, it would be very handy to touch base with you on the performance/implimentation over coming months - perhaps we could learn from you and pick up any tips.
Would you drop me a PM to see if there is anything we can share or your experiences to date
.
Many Thanks
Steve

Have worked with a company (called Oakleaf) in the past that uses a version of BackTraq, but as I recall they provide a few tweaks and adjustments to suit the needs. Might be worthwhile hooking your Estates people up with them to see if they can help make life a little easier. The company specialises in Estates software, so if they don't already know of them, they'd probably find other things on their shelves that would help the day-to-day.

That's my $0.02

Here's mine:-

1) Some sort of output results should be recorded for each PM, if only to 'prove' that the thing was actually tested. The previous results also help to give a clue to the next tech about what sort of output is being looked for! Basic electrical safety results could be jotted down, especially earth continuity, but, like Mark I would accept a pass/fail there.

2) Estates and biomed come at PM from a different perspective. Always have and always will. Software common to both departments will always be a compromise, at best (as has already been pointed out). And biomed will generally be the ones to loose out. Do like I did at a well-known hospital in a far-away Desert Kingdom; refuse to have the Hospital Engineer's lousy pet system foisted upon us, and get shifted to another hospital site as a result (where I used my own software)!

Hi all,
have to agree with Geoff, test results should be recorded against limits. This does, as Geoff pointed out gives some indication of Trend, which can be useful whilst conducting a PM.
We are currently using SI3C, developed from Sophie, Sophie 9000 then Asset Plus. Few minor failings but overall a very useful tool.
We are currently working on the paperless wksp, all tests are conducted through Ansur (Fluke) and tested with Fluke/Metron test equipment using test Templates/Sequences. The results are then stored electronically. The work report is then the only piece of paper left in our system. This will be eliminated fairly shortly with the introduction of electronic signatures.

At present, all our test results are printed out and kept in the individual device's history file. I agree this gives valuable evidence for trend evaluation and legal reasons, but surely the signature of the engineer in question should suffice as evidence of work carried out. If registration of Clinical Technologists/Engineers is implemented in the near future then hopefully this will give the powers that be, confidence that engineers are professional enough to warrant just a signature and save a few trees in the process.