Home Articles Downloads Forum Products Services EBME Expo Contact
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 6 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60
Super Hero
Offline
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60

Yes. Yes. Yes. But now that healthcare is being "driven from the other end" (as it were), the primary care medics, doctors, managers, bean-counters, commissioners (whatever) don't seem to appreciate the difference.

In many ways it's "back to square one"! frown


If you don't inspect ... don't expect.
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,020
Hero
Offline
Hero
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,020
Has it been safety checked? - Yes - box ticked.
Can it be done more cheaply next time?

The way of the brave new world

Robert


My spelling is not bad. I am typing this on a Medigenic keyboard and I blame that for all my typos.
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 98
Adept
Offline
Adept
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 98
RoJo is correct, of course there is more to checking that equipment is safe to use and gives accurate results than sticking a label on it. Unfortunately this is the tick a box stick a label on nonsense society we have become. I have been involved with electrical testing in its many different forms and I can say that PAT testing is a complete farce that exploits peoples' ignorance. This results in equipment that should be electrically tested being missed and other equipment being unnecessarily tested. It is not much good Joe Pat sticking a label saying test passed, safe to use etc. on a Vitalograph when the bellows are out of calibration, but whose fault is all of this? Is it Joe Pat trying to earn a living, a busy practice manager who just wants a bit of paper saying test passed or Med Eng Depts charging too much?

The answer is; what they want is a good dependable engineering journeyman (like myself and other greybeards) to go around local surgeries and advise them on what needs testing and calibrating and what does not. In fact after I retired a number of surgeries contacted me asking if I would continue in a self employed capacity. Perhaps I should have, but due to the high cost of the test equipment I declined. However I have always thought it a good idea to have a central pool of this equipment available for hire for people like myself to earn the odd shilling, even a club of greybeards. Until then when I visit my local surgery I expect to see Joe Pat labels on all and sundry.


Barney
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 578
Likes: 1
Philosopher
Offline
Philosopher
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 578
Likes: 1
If anything I would say that it's the complete opposite, one thing I have noticed since the demise of the PCTs is the demise of Joe Pat. If anything it's one thing to sell PAT testing to a couple of GP surgeries or a bunch of district nurses, but it's far harder to sell it to commissioners and groups of GP's.

It just takes one Pat tester who is 'servicing' their medical equipment to not fix the equipment and refer it back to the local Med Eng department and they've lost the whole area. Therefore I'd say stick to the day job Barney, I think you'll find there will be less demand.

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60
Super Hero
Offline
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60

You forgot to mention insurance, Barney. frown

@Robert: here's what will happen:- all will be well in this Brave New World until there are a few juicy "incidents". Then "they" will be running around like blue-arsed* flies trying to find someone to come in and sort out the mess. Until then, keep your powder dry. Patience my friend.

@Chris: you're not reading the posts. For Barney and many other "greybeards" (including myself, by the way) there is no "day job".

* Are they any good at covering their blue arses, I wonder?

Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 578
Likes: 1
Philosopher
Offline
Philosopher
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 578
Likes: 1
Well Geoff doesn't look like those "greybeards" will be in luck then does it. Since the start of the changes I've been out to some locations like a yo yo. I get a feeling that I visit one department (usually run by the Trust or commissioning group) and get noticed by another section. It does seem that if your actively visiting a site you'll have an advantage over somebody who just turns up for the day and will never be seen again until next year.

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60
Super Hero
Offline
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60

Yes Chris, we know how it works. But don't worry, this "greybeard" at least is happy enough to leave it all to you. smile

Meanwhile, back at the thread ...

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60
Super Hero
Offline
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60

How about this thread, Mike ... it's probably the most recent one that mentions 62353. think

When you were saying before about folk needing to adopt (follow) 62353 ... actually, I agree with you.

But, as I don't have the actual document to hand (but only John Backes' handy booklet), perhaps you could spell out exactly what's involved.

For instance, can we regard 62353 simply as a sub-set of 60601 ... thereby allowing us to carry on using our old EST's (Electrical Safety Testers)? Or do we need to think about investing in new test kit? And apart from the Rigel *288, which others are available?

And, apart from the introduction of "new models" of testing methods (the Differential, and Alternative methods), what compelling reasons are there to "change over" (from previous or current testing regimes)? BTW: do those two new testing methods have any great (practical) value, would you say?

Also, where is 62353 mandated? DB- (or MDD) this or that? What's the latest (or current) status of 62353 from the "official guidelines" point of view (in the UK, that is)?

From my own (limited) research it also gets a mention in other domains, by the way. In some ECRI documents, for example.

The bottom line being:- if folk want to align their procedures with the latest thinking here, what do they actually need to do? What steps do they need to take?

* There's nothing wrong with Rigel test kit, but its always nice to be aware of what else is out there!

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 289
Likes: 14
MikeX Offline OP
Master
OP Offline
Master
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 289
Likes: 14
Think of a pyramid with the law and the top and the multitude of guidance documents as the base at the bottom. Standards, which are interpretations of the law, sit above all the guidance documents in the order of things. This is a little understood aspect of the legal side of things. Therefore, for the UK, this means BS EN 62353 is the document all those who are involved in medical electrical equipment need to use.

A guidance document will never take precedence over a UK or international standard in any legal proceedings.

Most 60601 based test equipment, can be used for performing 62353 test with some slight adaption of procedures, but real time and cost savings can be made if you use dedicated 62353 testers and adopt the alternative methods for leakage measurements, where practical.

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60
Super Hero
Offline
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,654
Likes: 60

And presumably all that is covered on courses being run these days at ... wherever biomeds get their training these days? think

Meanwhile, as background, here is one of the many articles by John Backes to be found on the web. Others may be found here.

Now, after re-reading the first article I linked to, I can in part answer some of my own questions. So, here goes:-

The Differential Method copes with secondary earthing scenarios such as those that may be encountered with isolated mains power supplies in operating theatres (on pendulums, booms etc. - the clue being that a LIM will be around somewhere nearby). Presumably because it doesn't "need" an earth to take its measurements.

The Alternative Method can be used to determine current leakage prior to activating the equipment (why would you want to do that?), or when testing in an IT environment etc..

Good, practical stuff, then. Although I'm still not clear about the "IT environment" bit, I must admit (no proper earth available, perhaps?). smile

Page 6 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Moderated by  DaveC in Oz, RoJo 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
3 members (J Darby, daisizhou, 1 invisible), 334 guests, and 15 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
MDevins, EmsR16, Fergusben1, Guilherme Gomes, Salvatore
10,173 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums25
Topics11,055
Posts73,704
Members10,173
Most Online5,980
Jan 29th, 2020
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5