JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for ASSISTECH Archives


ASSISTECH Archives

ASSISTECH Archives


ASSISTECH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ASSISTECH Home

ASSISTECH Home

ASSISTECH  2002

ASSISTECH 2002

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Electrical safety testing regulations

From:

Gareth Adkins <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

A discussion list for Assistive Technology professionals.

Date:

Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:26:55 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (179 lines)

Barry and Tony,

Thanks for the information, I will get a copy of DB9801 as this would seem a
good starting place. I was aware of the 'hire' equipment stipulations in the
EAWR and agree that basic electrical safety testing is a good thing.


The main issue arises when NHS services take things 'inhouse'; I have not
had any proof of the main contractors for EAT being able to demonstrate that
tests to BSEN60601 have been done as part of PPM, maybe others would like to
comment. Its difficult enough to get them to fill in worksheets with
complete details. Furthermore, many contracted out wheelchair
repair/provision services do not conduct PPMs on power chairs and therefore
would not test the mains powered battery charger annually.

Consequently when NHS wishes to take things inhouse it faces the dilemma of
whether to cost in the extra resource required to conduct PPMs and thus
electrical testing. This is particularly relevant in wheelchair services due
to the relatively larger number of users to service. As with many things if
there is no absolute legal requirement to do it then the commissioners often
fail to see the need for extra resources to follow what amounts to best
practice, especially if existing contractors didn't do PPM anyway. A good
example of this is patient hoists, these are required to be tested by law
now every 6 months, but prior to this how many trusts tested their hoists?

So the more clear the requirement to test equipment is the more likely
commissioners are to fund the resources necessary to do it.

If an NHS department is taking a service inhouse and doesn't get the funding
for PPMs on power wheelchairs for example, what does it do. Most people
would answer risk assess and this involves cost effectiveness. For example
if an item of medical equipment requires calibration and functional safety
checks as well as electrical safety testing it would clearly be necessary to
test it, as I would imagine most equipment supported by medical physics
departments is. However, when an item does not require such tests such as
most EAT equipment or power wheelchair battery chargers it may not appear
cost effective.

From a risk management point of view, what is more likely an environmental
control, which are usually battery powered and if plugged in are connected
to double insulated chargers, malfunctions and electrocutes a patient via a
switch which in most cases would have to be faulty as well to deliver a
current (double fault situation); or a battery charger (for any piece of
equipment) have a damaged mains lead that electrocutes the patient. I would
argue the later and thus to ensure more services are able to provide basic
electrical safety a realistic target of requiring basic testing to be done
rather than saying all medical equipment should be tested to BSEN60601. Then
at least the overall standard would be up to a basic and probably more
important level of safety.

The above is not intended to say that I think services should stop testing
to the standards they have chosen but merely to highlight that services
should not take the approach 'we do it so why don't you' we all have
different priorities and funding so need to make different decisions. Hence
my original request for information to start making my own decisions as
nobody at present can tell me that there is definitive legislation on the
subject rather a lot of guidance.

I await the storm of controversy with interest, please feel free to shoot me
down in flames!

Many thanks once again to those who have provided useful info.

Gareth Adkins B. Eng. MSc. PGDip IPEM.
Rehabilitation Engineer
Mobility and Rehabilitation Service
Woodend Hospital
Eday Road
Aberdeen AB15 6LS




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Swann Tony (LHT) [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 22 October 2002 10:19
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Electrical safety testing regulations
>
> Dear Garth/Barry et al,
>
> I think you should have a look at the Electricity at Work Regulations.
> These
> regulations also include equipment hire situations which seems pretty
> applicable to the way EAT is typically dished out.
> BS60601 will be relevant as we are essentially dealing with medical
> equipment however BS3456 Household electrical appliances should not be
> over
> looked.
>
> We have a very useful book called 'Guide to Electrical Safety at work'
> published by E.P.A Press writen by a chap called John whitfield. ISBN No.
> 0
> 9517362 8 0. which is in an effective interpretation of the regulations
> and
> their implications. No idea whether this is still in Press. If anyone
> finds
> out I would be grateful if you could let me know as our copy was published
> in 1995.
>
> Tony Swann
> Clinical Scientist
> Elelctronic Assitive Technology Service
> East Lincolnshire PCT
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taylor, Barry [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 22 October 2002 10:02
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Electrical safety testing regulations
>
>
> Gareth
>
> My understanding (although my memory is dimmed by time!) is that the
> Health
> and Safety at work act applies strictly to equipment in our workplace
> (hospitals).
>  Medical equipment testing with a flavour of BSEN 60601is over and above
> the
> requirements of H & S @W act and is done on the basis of an old IPEM
> (/IPSM/IPEMB?...) topic group report (no 47???) which predates ENs and the
> Medical Device Directive and is well overdue for a rewrite.
> DB9801 and its supplement, specifically extend our responsibilities to
> health (& other) equipment in the community.
>
> Barry Taylor, Clinical Scientist
> Bioengineering Department
> Tulley Medical Physics Building, Hull Royal Infirmary
> Anlaby Road, Hull HU3 2JZ
> Tel 01482 675928, fax 01482 675750
>
> > ----------
> > From:         Gareth Adkins[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > Reply To:     A discussion list for Assistive Technology professionals.
> > Sent:         18 October 2002 11:18
> > To:   [log in to unmask]
> > Subject:      Electrical safety testing regulations
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I am trying to brush up on my knowledge of electrical safety testing
> > requirements and Health and Safety etc.
> >
> > I know that electrical equipment in the workplace is tested regularly
> > using
> > the appropriate standards under the requirements of the Health and
> Safety
> > at
> > work act etc.
> >
> > I also know that medical electrical safety equipment is tested regularly
> > to
> > EN60601 but I wasn't sure what legislation requires us to do this, is
> the
> > H
> > and S act? Further to this if it is H and S act what regulations cover
> > equipment used in a community setting but still owned by Health Board?
> >
> > Obviously I think routine electrical safety testing is best and accepted
> > practice but I wondered if anyone could shed some light on the
> legislation
> > so I don't have to trawl the internet and HSE for relevant info.
> >
> > Look forward to hearing the replies.
> >
> >
> >
> > Gareth Adkins B. Eng. MSc. PGDip IPEM.
> > Rehabilitation Engineer
> > Mobility and Rehabilitation Service
> > Woodend Hospital
> > Eday Road
> > Aberdeen AB15 6LS
> >

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager