COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY


Some solutions will of course not be dependent on the Trust- wide IT network; instead these might use Bluetooth, NFC (near field communication), 4/5G mobile data, or RF (radio frequency); all have their place depending upon the service required. Most importantly, all need to be fit for purpose, preferably have recognised accreditation, and be certified for the purpose that they are being used for. As already mentioned,


we use wire-free devices throughout our daily work and leisure time, and the device we rely most heavily on is totally devoid of any service-level agreement. Check for yourself – read the 30-page terms and conditions that Apple or Google ask you to agree to, and you will not find any legal redress if for some reason you are compromised due to a failure in an ‘app’ or the mobile device’s operating system. Similarly, your mobile network operator that provides you with your 4 and 5G data communication has little to offer you in compensation for any consequential losses due to network outages. We’re not talking about offering you a small sum for the inconvenience due to the actual loss of service; rather it’s the consequential loss you might suffer that no network corporation will compensate you for.


Such a scenario becomes ever more serious when our health, or even our life, might depend upon a solution being able to communicate for the manufacturer’s claimed 99.999% of the time. For this reason, there are documented standards available to enable solution manufacturers to design and build their solution to be reliable. Some of these ‘standards’ are


The ‘dynamic and cost-effective’ MicroTouch display screen system.


recommendations specific to the NHS, some relate to wire-free networks in general, and most can be used in order to attain certification that a product meets the standard, and is fit for the purpose it is being specified for.


Not mandatory The unfortunate thing is that many well- intentioned and extremely important standards are not mandatory, or the recommendations are just that – a recommendation to go and find the relevant standard and make sure that any solution procured can perform to it. How, therefore, can those charged with the decision-making process within an NHS Trust be certain that a product can do what it says it can, and will be operating to a minimum standard of performance? NHS Health Technical Memoranda


(HTMs) give comprehensive advice and guidance on the design, installation, and operation, of specialised building and engineering technology used in the delivery of healthcare. The focus of Health Technical


With the latest communications technology, information about a patient’s medication, symptoms, and medical history, can all be accessed at the time of need.


Memorandum guidance remains on healthcare-specific elements of standards, policies, and up-to-date established best practice. The various HTM documents are applicable to new and existing sites, and are for use at various stages during the whole building lifecycle. Healthcare providers of course have a duty of care to ensure that appropriate governance arrangements are in place, and are managed effectively. The Health Technical Memorandum series provides best practice engineering standards and policy to enable management of this duty of care. HTMs therefore put the responsibility onto the Trust’s management personnel to ensure that any technology procured is not only fit for purpose, but that it also meets the required standards relevant to the technology, Thus simply adding the words ‘must comply with HTM xxx’ in a specification or procurement documentation is not the end of the story. Manufacturers and suppliers of technology


must firstly declare that their solution meets the relevant HTM recommendations, and then prove how this is achieved. If we look more closely


at Health Technical Memorandum 08-03: Bedhead services, for example, it was written in 2013 with representation from the NHS, building and facility management organisations, and


technology providers, using traditional communication methods typical of that decade. We immediately identify then that a set


of recommendations written over 10 years ago is going to be very outdated, especially when considering the speed of innovation in healthcare and communications technology. That having been said, HTM 08-03 is


the obvious reference document when specifying bedhead technology, and therefore the ‘go-to’ reference when procuring new services. While HTM 08-03 hasn’t changed in 10 years, the applicable technology and recognised standards have. I make reference to the following paragraph in the document:


Statutory requirements and functional guidance 3.6 It is the responsibility of management to ensure that their premises and bedhead services are safe, fit for purpose, and comply with all statutes, relevant codes of practice and standards.


3.7 Management has an overriding general duty of care under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.


3.8 Materials, components and completed installations should conform as applicable with the current Standards, including all amendments. Construction products should comply with European Standards and Technical Specifications (ESTS). Wherever reference is made to a British Standard, a corresponding ESTS (generally ISO series) should be equally acceptable.


Not time-bound Clearly the statutory requirements are not time-bound, and must comply with current standards. For some manufacturers of technology, simply building a solution that meets the functional requirements of HTM 08-03 and declaring this in their marketing literature appears to them to be sufficient, and indeed for some NHS Trusts this might be enough to tick the ‘HTM 08-03 compliant’ box without further proof or checks. The more prudent procurement management professional, however, will


June 2024 Health Estate Journal 73


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76