TY - CONF
T1 - A new proposal of quality indicators for clinical engineering
T2 - A New Beginning for Human Health: Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society
AU - Rodriguez, E.
AU - Miguel, A.
AU - Sanchez, M.C.
AU - Tolkmitt, F.
AU - Pozo, E.
AU - EMB, IEEE
A2 - R.S., Leder
N1 - Conference code: 62438
Cited By :4
Export Date: 19 March 2018
CODEN: CEMBA
Correspondence Address: Rodriguez, E.; Department of Bioengineering, Havana Technical University, CUJAE, Havana City, Cuba
References: Stiefel, (1995) Managing Assertively, p. 90; (2001) Clinical Engineering Management Plan, , http://www2.mc.duke.edu/depts/clineng/; Brinkman, M.O., In-House Survival in an Asset Management Climate (1998) Biomed. Instrum. & Tech, pp. 425-427; Clinical Engineering Department, , http://www2.mc.duke.edu/depts/clineng/cestats.htm; http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/efficacy; Miguel, A., Sánchez, M.C., Rodríguez, E., Propuesta y diseño de un sistema de gestión tecnológica hospitalaria (1999) Ingeniería Electrónica, Automática y Comunicaciones, 20, p. 4; Rodríguez, E., Sánchez, M.C., Miguel, A., Gestión de Mantenimiento para Equipes Médicos (2001) Ingeniería Electrónica, Automática y Comunicaciones, , 1; Sánchez, M.C., Miguel, A., Rodríguez, E., Sistema para la planificatión del mantenimiento preventivo para equipos médicos SMACOR (1999) Ingeniería Electrónica, Automática y Comunicaciones, 20, p. 4
PY - 2003
Y1 - 2003
N2 - As we know from Stiefels paper "...we want to do our work right the first time and better the next time. But we really don't know whether we have done it right, or are doing it better, unless we have a measurement system for quality."1 Unfortunately, there is little agreement in the standardization of indicators used for evaluation of organizations related to medical equipment management. And those that do the first steps, always walk on thin ice. With this paper, we suggest a set of five quality indicators for the control and the evaluation of management for medical equipment maintenance. The indicators proposed allow the organization, that applies them, to easily correct and adjust their management programs, with a strive for improvement in results and quality and broadening their experiences. The selection of the indicators was executed according to those that are most used among leading health care organizations. Sometimes the indicators are labeled differently but the basic idea is the same, and therefore the results can be compared competitively and the potential of an organization can be displayed.
AB - As we know from Stiefels paper "...we want to do our work right the first time and better the next time. But we really don't know whether we have done it right, or are doing it better, unless we have a measurement system for quality."1 Unfortunately, there is little agreement in the standardization of indicators used for evaluation of organizations related to medical equipment management. And those that do the first steps, always walk on thin ice. With this paper, we suggest a set of five quality indicators for the control and the evaluation of management for medical equipment maintenance. The indicators proposed allow the organization, that applies them, to easily correct and adjust their management programs, with a strive for improvement in results and quality and broadening their experiences. The selection of the indicators was executed according to those that are most used among leading health care organizations. Sometimes the indicators are labeled differently but the basic idea is the same, and therefore the results can be compared competitively and the potential of an organization can be displayed.
M3 - Paper
SP - 3598
EP - 3601
ER -
