EBME Forums Forums Free discussion Free discussion Staffing Levels for EBME deptments.

Do WHAT !... "if we want to aim"?... Who wants to aim for six-monthly PMs? I sure don't. Quite the contrary. At the risk of getting off subject, we already test more than is actually nessesary or productive. What about the risk based approach to PM schedules? A lot of the modern kit does not need even 12 monthly testing, I can think of nothing that should require 90 days.
Sorry Geoff but that is .....just wrong, and not realistic in view of modern standards of technology or the processor based systems (with all the selfcheck systems in place) that we deal with these days. 200 - 300 per tech? you jest me thinks!

[reaction time clock running..... 5...4...3...2...1...]

Yep, and I know that PM is essential and a basic non negotiable part of the job, but it does not stop someone who spent a lot of time and energy getting an engineering degree complaining about having to test a pulse oximeter, and I can't say I blame them !

Yes this is the way to justify the headcounts. Main core comes from the CM and PM. We are getting a fair bit of new replacement equipment now. This will add to the workload as well.

Cheers!

Er ... nonsense!

I can only conclude that you're in the wrong line of work, Dave!

I know all about Risk-Centred Maintenance (and endorse that approach, I might add), by the way. Look it up using the Search facility ... I would do it for you, but I think I may have lost the will to live (time for a cup of tea, I think)!

But (before I put the kettle on), what does your over-qualified complainer like to do, then ... sit on his (her) fat [censored] all day?

Tea is good, though at this time of night in Oz, wine is better !

Really Geoff?, nonsense? which particular point do you take exception to?... and yes, I have previously looked at the various contibutions on the matter of risk based systems (a particular passion of mine). You say you endorse risk based PM yet make statements like this. Nonsense, I say.

Could you honestly stand up and justify a 200 - 300 testable items per tech approach? I cannot see how this could be justified.

Your turn.......

Just about all of it. It seems to me that your basic premise is all wrong. You seem to be saying that you're happy about not seeing kit at all in over a year (and then telling me that I'm wrong)!

I don't have the time or the inclination to go through it all again (that is, summarize most of my many earlier posts on these issues), but suffice to say that you can't get RCM underway without having (traditional) PM squared away first. You cannot start adjusting PM intervals until you have some historical PM to base your decisions on.

And (I might add) I know of many hospital biomed sheds that have never got anywhere near having a PM schedule in place. Some of those guys haven't even attempted it. They are not really biomeds at all, in my opinion. For all the good they do, the Trust may as well get rid of the lot of them, and simply call in outsiders as and when a repair is indicated (which is just about all the guys mentioned manage to do - the odd repair, that is).

Surely we can all agree that a biomed must believe in a few fundamental points. Namely:-

1) Patient safety (mainly, but not only, electrical safety)
2) Regular inspections and preventive maintenance
3) Efficient response to breakdowns

What's the problem?

Examples of kit that warrant 90 day I/PM:-

1) Anaesthesia machines
2) Defibrillators
3) Dialysis units
4) Ventilators

Yes, I'm sure we all agree with points 1, 2, and 3... certainly, no arguement, but...... (there had to be a "but" did there not)


exactly my point, but why the tradional view? We, those of us who have the years of data available, should be able and willing to make these decisions and not be tied to tradition. I am happy to see some kit tested at a greater interval than one year... to see it more frequently is a waste of time in my opinion ( I brought this up at a recent managers meeting and thought I was going to be lynched but there you go, that happens when you express "radical" opinions)
As to these "biomed sheds" that do no PM, agreed, take the bloodly lot of them out and have them shot for the charlatans that the are !! It's a disgrace.

Examples given, 1,2,3,4, six months is quite enough

Have to agree with you entirely on this one Geoff, nobody wants to carry out unnecessary work, however patient safety is the key. I mainly work in the SCBU, and have set up the units ppm schedules. Ventillators, CPAPS and transport incubators have been set up on 3 monthly schedules for this very reason. Although due to staffing levels (the main topic funnily enough) I cannot always keep to the schedule, the intent is there and thus allows me to prioritise my burgeoning workload.

On the subject of staffing levels, I have one word to describe ours:

Ridiculous

@Dave.

Do I detect a weakening of resolve? How disappointing (must be the wine, I guess).

"Radical" is fine by me. But my point about (lack of PM) is that what hope is there for RCM to be adopted as the method of choice, when most of the ... er, charlatans have yet to make the move off first base? That is, they're still entrenched in the "repair as necessary" mindset?

Some of us (many, I hope) moved away from that, and onto PM ... well, at least thirty years ago!

So, there it is ... the progression, the evolution, from Homo Erectus to Homo Biomed ...

CM -> PM -> RCM

QED

Point taken. But it's all inter-related is it not?

As I keep saying:- "time is all any of us has"!

Re: 90 day I/PM:-

1) Transport incubators - yes, 90 days
2) Standard neonatal incubators - 180 days should be OK
3) CPAP - I would have thought 180 days (but am willing to be swayed)

I always used to add Blood Gas Analyzers under 90 days as well (but don't want to labour the point too much by venturing into the realms of lab equipment)!

a weakening of resolve? ceratinly not. The need to get to bed and sleep before tomorrow, and the 5 hour round trip I have to do, perhaps.
You confuse me Geoff, do you want risk based or 6 monthly for everything (except those to be done 3 monthly)? The two do not seem to mix well. Risk will bring may variables, set schedules do not. You seem to prefer set schedules.

Enough already, I'm of to bed.... but will get back to you in about 12 hours if you wish to keep this going (unless Huw gets up us again!!)

Night night