engaging with healthcare professionals in india to improve … · mumbai jan. 18 nagpur jan. 21...
TRANSCRIPT
Engaging with healthcare professionals
in India to improve medical device safety:
Medical Equipment Safety Workshop Series (India 2013)
ND Khambete* and A Murray†
*Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, India [email protected]
†Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK [email protected]
Pilot survey results
Percentage of ICU and OT clinicians (total 41) reporting direct experience
of compromise in safety with various types of medical equipment
Khambete et al, 2010, IET Seminar, London
Muscle Stimulator
Heart Lung Machine
ECG Recorder
Defibrillator
Anesthesia Machine
Sphygmomanometer
ICU Ventilator
Infusion pump
Suction Pump
Surgical Lamp
Patient Monitor
Motorised OT Table
Electrosurgery Equipment
3
5
10
13
15
15
18
26
28
28
31
54
64
MedEqSafe – INDIA, 2013
Pune
Jan. 20
Thiruvananthapuram
Jan. 16
Bengaluru
Jan. 17
Mumbai
Jan. 18
Nagpur
Jan. 21
Wardha
Jan. 22
Delhi
Jan. 23
Chandigarh
Jan. 24,
MedEqSafe – INDIA, 2013
Host Institutes
Kerala Institute of Medical Sciences, Trivandrum
St. John’s Medical College, Bangalore
Padmashree DY Patil University, Mumbai
Deenanath Mangaeshkar Hospital and Research Centre, Pune
NKP Salve Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagpur
Indira Gandhi Government Medical College, Nagpur
Government Medical College, Nagpur
Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha
Association of Healthcare Providers (India), New Delhi
Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigrah
Organising InstitutesSree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology (SCTIMST), Trivandrum
College of Engineering, Pune (COEP)
Survey Details
Respondees 456
Cities in which presentations made 8
Presentations made 11
Hospital beds of respondees 46 to 2500
Years experience of respondees 0.1 to 38 years
Device types surveyed 15
Incidents observed in these devices 1162
Respondees details
Hospital Type
26%
52%
20%Charitable Hospitals
Private Hospitals
Government Hospitals
Specialty
19 %
11 %
13 %
2 %9 %
10 %
36 %
Surgery
Medicine
Anaesthesia
Radiology
Paediatric
Obs. & Gyn.
Mixed (nurses)
Respondees details
Level of training
26 %
12 %
2 %
40 %
5 %
7 %
6 %
8 %
Practicing Doctors
Resident Doctors
UG Medical Students
Practicing Nurses
Nursing Students
Hospital Administrators
Clinical Engineers
Clinical Technicians
Results
Equipment incidents
14 %
16 %
18 %
20 %
21 %
22 %
23 %
25 %
27 %
27 %
28 %
29 %
29 %
33 %
35 %
Heart Lung Machine
Muscle Stimulator
Ultrasound machine
Laproscopic surgery
X-rays
Anaesthesia Machine
ECG Recorders
ICU Ventilators
Defibrillator
Motorised OT Table
Infusion Pupms
Patient monitors
BP Apparatus
Suction Pumps
Surgical Electrocuatery
Conclusions
� Increase awareness of medical device safety among healthcare professionals, authorities and policy makers
� Take urgent steps to establish Medical Device Regulatory Authority
� Establish a statutory body to regulate Clinical Engineering profession through accredited training and certification programmes
� Allocate financial resources to address the above challenges
Acknowledgements
� Medical Devices, WHO
� Director, SCTIMST
� All colleagues for patiently helping
in data entry and analysis
Thank you very much
