EBME Forums Forums Maintenance Technical Assistance OR Integration

Once again check out Macquarie University Hospitals youtube channel, I think they have got everything right they have the hospital of the future right now, no point redesigning the wheel.

As one of my old architect buddies was fond of saying:-

"There is no such thing as the prefect design".

And, do you know what? He was right!

Then there was the oft-repeated remark:- "Form follows function".*

Also the idea of "The Hospital as a System" (which, to my certain knowledge, has been bandied about since at least the 1980's ... and is a concept that I have always liked, and endeavoured to follow, myself).

What is perceived as "ideal" in one set of circumstances (and budget) can equally be found wanting in another. In the Real World, if the design pleases the client (that is, meets his aspirations, and does what he wants from the functional point of view) then that is usually enough to keep him happy (and have him pay the fees. LOL).

I still remember cases where well-developed (and entirely adequate) designs - and/or equipment proposals - were totally rejected out of hand after a change of personalities on the clients' side.

* Which we agreed should have been revised to read:- "form follows funding"!

Do we have a definition of what is being meant here by "OR integration", or the "integrated OR"? Are we primarily talking about linking (co-ordinating) *equipment, or what?

To my mind it's not a lot of use dreaming about OTT OT's (shall we say) if the power still goes off three times a day (for example)!

Meanwhile, for as long as I can remember, the idea of the "surgeons' panel" has been around as a way of putting light switches, temperature controls, comms etc. ... and (traditionally) radiograph viewers all together at a single (and hopefully, sensible, location). Doing things that way makes life much easier during construction and **installation, I might add. What the Macquarie video indicates is the need for a few more video (graphics) displays!

* Probably from a single manufacturer - due to lack of standard interface protocols.

** Which could be why they are often preferred by engineers - as it simplifies the whole process - but not by architects (it puts a damper on their artistic flair, you know). Thoughtful design places maintenance access to the panel from the rear - outside of the theatre. But it seems that architects often fail to pay too much attention to those sort of niceties!

PTS:- less staff running around the hospital (and sometimes ending up in the wrong place ... or even getting lost altogether)!

Hi Geoff .. after a long time..

Yes, it is linking all the equipments (microscopes,endoscopes, c arm, OR Light, surgery robots etc and any equipment with a video output as well)

The good thing you have is that you get the complete diagnostic data of a patient inside an OR in a single folder (unique patient ID tag) stored in a central storage system. At the same time you sent the data realtime to the hospital auditorium or a live conference elsewhere. There are review monitors inside the OR.

and yes if the OR integration solution provider provides a vendor neutral system then its the best. It gives you freedom to choose the products you are interested in. That, I think is more interesting and important.

Meanwhile ... let's link!