EBME Forums Forums Free discussion Free discussion Working environment

Karl
I am not in competition with other depts in our region, but if there is a community hospital within out area, and they approach us for an SLA costing, we will supply that costing.

All our SLA agreements are non-profit and our techs are a mix of some from industry who we trained, and some with previous experience.

My preference for service provision would be that we all know what we should be doing, and doing it in the same way using the same processes. If we could achieve this, there is then an opportunity to form strategic alliances to build a nationwide organisation of professionally run depts who could work together to share resources, and compete with the big boys.

One thing that lets us down is our inability to form cohesive networks. If we did (and worked in partnership), we could outsource to manufacturers, instead of it being the other way around. We could generate income to finance the investment needed in resources, etc.etc.

John, my coupe de main, do you have a plan B with regards to protecting your staff in the unlikely event of losing a contract?

Yes
Last in first out (only joking Elaine)

The amount of external work we carry represents 1WTE technician at MTO3, plus some management spread across a few different community hospital contracts.

There would be no redundancies.

John my possessor of unlimited sagacity, I see by ones profile you like to ferment your own grog, any chance of getting a few of our fellow compatriots together one fine evening for a quick snifter or three of the old Sir John Barleycorn.

This topic is getting more interesting by the hour!

I'd like to add my tuppence worth concerning the rationale of the increasing prevalence of outsourcing of medical equipment maintenance to the private sector.

NHS Purchasing & Supply Agency (PASA) amongst others seem to be trying to sell this idea to NHS Trusts as a panacea for all their (perceived) medical equipment maintenance ills. PASA's main thrust seems to be that there is a transfer of risk onto the private sector contractor (other than actually procuring maintenance contracts, can PASA demonstrate “expert knowledge” in the provision of medical equipment maintenance I wonder?). To a very small degree, this is correct and has been confirmed at a recent conference by a representative from the Medical Devices Agency (MDA). However, this MDA person also stated that by far the greatest number of medical device adverse incidents reported to his organisation were user related and not maintenance related. The degree of risk involved with the ownership of any medical device lies with its deployment and subsequent use. Instinctively and with experience we all know this to be true. If its not used or stored correctly, the risk of something untoward happening is greatly increased (see Controls Assurance for Medical Device Management).

So, in the risk management world, if this can be shown to have some substance, does not this go some way to negate the current argument in favour of outsourcing of the maintenance? If the greatest risk lies with the use of the device and not with maintaining it, what's the problem with in-house maintenance?

One problem is that of politics: with a big P and a little p (no pun intended!). Central government is (still) intent on involving the private sector in the provision of key public services. In our neck of the woods, this is falling on the manufacturers and suppliers of medical equipment to the NHS to also supply its maintenance. There is such an obvious conflict of interest here (I don't think I need to elaborate do I?) which is working in favour of the (ever fewer) private sector companies.

Louis is quite correct in his assertion that there needs to be a national concerted effort in opposing this slide into the private sector. If this is allowed to go full term, we will all as taxpayers lose out because if left to the private sector, the cost of medical equipment (including its maintenance) will go through the roof.

Unfortunately at the moment there doesn't seem to be any organisation capable of providing constructive opposition. Perhaps it's time for IPEM and ECRI (MDA too?) for example, to get off the fence, start talking to each other (and to us, the great unwashed) and get some sort of strategy together?

Morris.
Never a truer set of words have been spoken.
Maybe we all need to put together a pleading for visitation from the hob knobs, all could put forward their concerns.
This would sort out the men from the boys.
A sort of put your points forward session.
As public servants we could maybe even request that one of the highest of the high is invited Iam sure that senior politicians would relish the thought of giving us a hearing.
It would of course have to be done in person and real names, personalities!!!
What say the masses??

Ostentation my brethren, ostentation, Comrade in arms, inheritance of the saints in light, my fellow treasury of everlasting joy, I feel much celestial bliss this fine and wonderful noon, My dearest “Steering Committee”, please take heed of what my fellow coefficient's are saying. The time is now, is it not your duty to bring these empiric souls together, Encompass them into your bosom, together in all their true glory and with their true identities, to meet the masters and enlighten them to our cause.

Some very good points. The EBME steering group is meeting on September 26th and I will bring up these very relevant points.

I am also on the the Special Interest Group for Medical Engineering at the IIE, which is meeting at the 6th National Biomedical and Clinical Engineering on 17th October 2002 (Philips Medical Systems UK Ltd)

I will bring it up on that agenda too. Hopefully, we are working towards developing a strategy for marketing our profession.

So far as training is concerned, we (as a dept)are actively developing training as a key responsibility. I totally agree that maintenance will reduce and training increase. If we are not on the bandwagon, we will find our depts getting left out in the dark.

With regard to my homebrew - 2 litres of malt, 1Kg of sugar, 25 litres of water some brewers yeast, and some tender loving care gives a very palatable lager. Sorry to dissapoint you louis, but thats my tipple. (By the way, you are welcome to a pint if you're in my area)

John, I have some questions for you, if you don't mind:

Whose interests do you represent at these meetings - is it IIE members/the steering group/your own department/ those of the NHS engineering community at large? What are these views and ideas that you intend to present in your meetings? Are you certain that your views and ideas will be representative and in the interests of the majority of the group that you wish to represent? Is cooperation and involvement with other bodies (such as IPEM, IEE, IMECH, IHEEM) envisaged?

It's just that this steering group business seems to have sprung out of nowhere and there's not much transparency at the moment. I'm wondering what work has been done in the background and by whom.

Richard
The SIG group of the IIE represents the views of members of the IIE.

The EBME steering group is made up of engineers with a genuine concern for medical engineering.

They are drawn from this forum and are members of various institutes including the IIE, IEE, IHEEM, IPEM etc.

I really don't think that it matters which institute you belong to. It does matter that whoever is on the steering group has the time and committment to push forward the general consensus.

If you are interested in being on the steering group, give me a call on 01279 827533.