EBME Forums Forums Management Professional Issues IPEM Registration

All though this may be true, as I have said time and time again, it's the function of the person that will possibly become registered.
This will be backed up with the statement
" Clinical tech. or anyone who carries out the function of the Clinical Tech. is required to be registered, and no registered clinical tech must knowingly work with an unregistered person carrying out this function"
This is simular to wording they have used in the past.
This shows it makes no difference what you call yourself.

My wife is a dental Nurse but you still have to be registered to be a chairside assistant, a dental assistant or any other variant to do the job legally, and the dentist is just as likely legally to be blame for permitting the unregistered person to act as a dental nurse as the un registered dental nurse.

I don't want to start a fight but, this whole issue of registration is a load of c**p. It will only work if everyone is treated equally. Don't forget that there is a very wide variety of pople in our line of work. No one model of registration will work. The only suitable form of "registration" would be to qualify as Eng Tech, IEng or CEng (in the UK). Is a Philips Engineeer working on Ultrasound scanners a Healthcare Scientist Practitioner?

Anyway, Happy New Year one and all!!

Now for us I can't see "no registered clinical tech must knowingly work with an unregistered person ..." ever working. It does seem what the HPC doesn't understand they regulate, but I could only see this applying to people working in the NHS. Otherwise all service personnel from companies that make medical equipment, who come onto NHS property would need to also be registered. Hence a Philips Engineer would need to be a Healthcare Scientist Practitioner.

Also I understand that the plan was that registration would occur above band 5 and that those below band 5 would either be trainees or assistances. If the above statement is correct would those above band 4 not work with those below!

I just knew when Eddie started this thread it would go on and on with the same tiresome BS!

Whoever these HPC people are, it sounds to me like they've got too much time on their hands. Are these NHS people? If so, it's a pity they don't apply themselves to helping the sick and needy, just as (presumably) they are paid to do! Surely there's enough there to keep them occupied?

In the real world, there's no such thing as a "Healthcare Scientist Practitioner". The terminology doesn't even make sense!

As I keep on saying (and like to believe that most agree), we are Engineering Technicians who happen to be working in the so-called "Healthcare Industry"! In the UK, we are (already) regulated by the Engineering Council (who, for reasons best known only to themselves, these days like to be called ECUK). So if you're a member say, of IHEEM or IPEM, then you're already under the ECUK umbrella. How many times do you need to be registered, or regulated? And who's to say that the "rules" of one body doesn't conflict in some way with those of another?

Who are these people trying to "protect" anyway? The patients? Don't make me laugh. Anything that we could impose upon some poor soul lying there pales to insignificance when compared to what the medics seem willing to inflict. Just keep up with the national news stories covering the NHS for evidence of that.

Meanwhile, those in our midst who are frustrated medics should go away and get trained as nurses, physicians, paramedics or whatever else it is they fantasize about being!

I assume that was meant as a joke or did you really not know who the HPC are!

Don't know, and don't want to know! Government quangoes are two-a-penny in this country. In ten years time, they will be history, I wouldn't be surprised.

But thanks for the link. I see:-

Arts therapists, Biomedical scientists, Chiropodists/podiatrists, Clinical scientists, Dietitians, Occupational therapists, Operating department practitioners, Orthoptists, Paramedics, Physiotherapists, Prosthetists/orthotists, Radiographers, Speech and language therapists.

... but no sign of Engineering Technicians (thankfully).

PS: the poor (inconsistent) use of capital letters is "theirs", not mine.

This is what we are up against in the NHS Geoff. Too many people interfering. I don't think that they have too much time on their hands it's just that they are in non-jobs! A major issue in the NHS. I'm not for sacking people without good cause but there must be a good 5 to 10% of staff that could be lost without compromising patient safety, all in management and admin support (of management).

Like many, I should imagine, I keep a weather eye on NHS issues in the "media". Although I don't work for the NHS myself, it is still our NHS, is it not?

As we all know, there has been, and continues to be, an almost endless stream of "negative press" about the NHS (justifiably, by the look of it). One of the nice things (I think) about the internet news sites is that many afford the opportunity for the "viewers" to leave their comments. And now many thoughtful people are asking questions like:-

"After sixty years of a National Health Service, how come the British people don't appear to be such an healthy crowd (when compared with other nations)"?

"How come people get a better service in France ... or Poland"?

"With more money than ever being pumped into the NHS, how come we keep hearing these horror stories"? ... I'll spare you the links, but they are there for all to see on the news sites every day.

"Why do we keep hearing about NHS staff raking in obscene amounts of money, and working double shifts etc.?" ... ditto.

"Would it not be better to privatise the whole thing, and simply pay our contributions into an insurance scheme?" ... and stuff like that.

I'm afraid that the NHS is largely perceived as the last bastion of the fat public service type of organisation (if indeed, organisation is a word that fits), complete with gravy trains, jobs for life and all the rest.

It seems to be me that there are far too many "non-patient care" types ensconced in our hospitals. And even some (well paid) nursing staff who (probably as a result of so-called "higher education") adopt the view that they are "above" the more "unsocial" aspects of caring for the sick and needy. If they don't really want to be nurses, perhaps they would be happier as sales reps, or whatever (a similar logic should apply to biomeds).

Time for a major sort out? Of course. But will it happen? Don't hold your breath. There are simply too many snouts in the trough.

I was very careful to not have an opinion in my post on the 30th. Just state the facts as anyone can find them.

Yes I think it will cause problems, and the pen pushers know it will. In fact I’m sure they will get a bit fat pay rise out of it some how, or at least an assistant.

The original post was about the value for money aspect of the IPEM. It then had gone down the route of job requirements, imposed by the pen pushers.

I think this situation we are in, is who to join if anyone. Until clear lines are drawn. There are going to be differing opinions of whether we should or not, or whether we need to or not, or indeed whether these points are in fact the same.

Refusing to comment on the situation just stifles the debate and allows the state to make a decision on the subject without a voice from us. So I must continue to voice my opinion as often in as many places as possible.

MY opinion is there should be a register and there should be different levels of equipment at which people are rated e.g. Anaesthetics, ventilation or some other denomination.
Fail the register and the person would be excluded from that category or area of work, possibly the lot, depending on the severity of the cock up.
More lines of punishment, without loss of employment. With clear levels of competency and a progression route back from the edge of losing skills to other industries.

Competency could be manufacturer certification on the equipment within a category. Or successful pass performance at an assistant level with other registered staff counter signing of sufficient aptitude.
The closest I can find to this is the VRCT system, so the value of the organisation to me is high, and the low registration cost is affordable, and in some cases claimable.
The IPEM subscribes to the Uk Spec system which is good, but this is not tailored to our industry. The information services the IPEM offer is relevant and very good and this I believe is what makes them relevant to us but weather it’s enough to cover subscription or not is the question?

"Would it not be better to privatise the whole thing, and simply pay our contributions into an insurance scheme?" ... and stuff like that.

44 million plus citizens uninsured in the US and double the adminstrative costs compared to single payer health systems elsewhere comes to mind.