EBME Forums Forums Management Medical Equipment Management Managed v's In House Service

Just wondering what happens, that's all. As the question was posed in-house-v-managed I was wondering about the workforce in all this. As you know from out here the workforce are offered the choice to leave or transfer, would the same happen there.

Yes, that's yet another model. One or two techs ... with a generous budget and authority to be able to call in service as and when required!

Another variation is the same one or two techs ... but with a large packing bench and suitable materials (boxes etc.) to be able to send stuff away for repair.

It is indeed true that there is more than one way to ... skin a cat!

But you're right about the value of having people in-house to deal with the user(s). This element of biomed work is invaluable, but difficult to express in any way meaningful to the afore mentioned bean counters!

In fact I would say that there should always be at least one tech resident in any hospital worthy of the name, even if all he can manage is first response, a quick look, then call upon someone else if repairs (etc.) are needed. Again, it's a method that I've seen give good results.

My emphasis is slightly different, Neil. To my mind, primarily it's the kit that matters!

As I've already said, good techs will still be needed regardless of whether the kit is maintained by X, Y or (even) Z.

But ... to answer your question:- TUPE!

Actually what I was getting at, is that if the workforce is worth keeping, then there must be a problem with the management.

Talking as someone working in a PFI hospital (EBME was retained) it amazes me what our PFI partners consider to be their core service to the Trust and what is an extra that needs charging for.

I am also amazed by what the PFI agreement says and wonder how so much was missed by the so called experts that wrote and signed the deal.

I am firmly against the privatisation of any service in the NHS; if an outside agency can run the service better than it is currently being run, then equally it must be possible to improve the way the internal service is run.

Having said that once an agreement with your MES is signed the Trust "Management" can not come a long and say "oh your budget has been reduced by 20%" or "when your staff leave you can not replace them" or what is even more common "from this date you need to do this additional work" with no more staff or money.

Lee

Neil, there is always a problem with the management!

Lee ... you can put a Baboon in a suit, and you might even be able to get him to become reasonably au fait at using spreadsheets ... but, at the end of the day, a Baboon is still a Baboon.

Monkey See, Monkey Do, is how we are describing some of the work we have seen recently.

Towards the end of a managed service there is always the uncertainty that 'will be retained, will the company win a new contract' also the added pressure of maintaining 'unreal' targets.

Very few people are comfortable with change. In fact, most feel threatened by it.

That may well be one of the reasons why so many in-house biomed departments in the NHS seemingly prefer to simply carry on under achieving, year in, year out.

I believe that, on balance, the occasional shake-up (followed, hopefully, by a few years in calmer waters, and on an even keel) may not be such a bad thing.

At least we might see a few more maintenance assessments carried out, decent inventories taken, tools and test equipment checked, parts and manuals counted (and all the rest of that stuff that you and I would be familiar with).

I guess that you haven't had the opportunity to visit too many NHS biomed sheds, Neil. Well, take it from me that they vary widely. From "state of the art" (centre of excellence, best practice etc.) to ... er, sleepy hollow.

Oh yeah, got that the wrong way round didn't I, still, you know what I mean.

should have been "by an outside contractor"