21ST-CENTURY TECHNOLOGY


was recorded, and analysis showed every single equipment move was detected almost instantly.


NHS Forth Valley was already using an active RFiD Discovery system to track 4,000 mobile medical devices using a network of 200 readers in real time. The Trust has now replaced existing asset labels with passive RFID tags for all medical devices – including beds, and uses an RFID trolley to undertake regular audits. Location information from the new PervasID reader is transferred into the main RFiD Discovery database, which can be accessed by clinical and engineering staff. Bryan Hynd, head of Medical Physics, explained: “Clinical staff can now see if any of their equipment is in our workshop. Even though we tell ward staff when we take one of their devices, during a shift change this information is often not passed on.”


Valuable data collected The new PervasID reader allows NHS Forth Valley to automatically see if any of its 10,000 passively tagged devices are in the workshop. The tracking information also provides valuable data on how long equipment has been awaiting repair or maintenance.


Tracking surgical instruments Following the successful trial, NHS Forth Valley is planning to install a further PervasID reader in its theatre store room, where surgical instrument trays are stored, ‘often stacked on top of each other’. Harland Simon says that, currently, ‘there is no real visibility of the level of equipment available, and reason to believe that this may have led to overstocking’.


‘Compelling evidence’ of RFID’s benefits to at the Scottish Trust had already been detailed in a Test of Change report published by Healthcare Sciences Scotland in April 2017, highlighting how it had achieved a cost avoidance of £360,000, and was expecting further annual cost savings of £200,000, ‘by investing £200,000 in active and passive RFID tagging of medical devices’.


A full audit in days


The main drivers for introducing RFID tracking at FVRH were problems keeping track of mobile medical devices, time wasted locating equipment, poor utilisation, and ‘budget constraints’, which meant purchasing additional equipment was not an option. New government regulations also require hospitals to undertake a full audit of all their medical devices every 12 months. Previously, it took the hospital’s Medical Physics team three months to complete a full inventory. Recently, using a mobile RFID trolley reader, an audit of 10,000 tagged devices was completed in just three days.


36 Health Estate Journal June 2018


Doctors and other clinicians look set to make increasing use of VR technology – in areas ranging from planning the design of new clinical spaces, to ‘practising’ complex operations before actually undertaking surgery.


Income generation


Tas Hind said: “Operating theatres are one of the most expensive areas of a hospital; while costs vary, the British Medical Journal estimates they are around £1,200 an hour. If run efficiently, however, they can be very profitable. The NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement has calculated that the average Trust can save £7 million annually by running a productive theatre. An electronic tracking solution is one way to achieve this. The operational benefits include keeping patients and families better informed, and reducing their waiting time. Reduced waiting time means small waiting areas. It’s easy to see how developing one efficiency snowballs into multiple benefits in just one area of the estate.


Identifying patient flow issues “The big advantage of using monitoring and measuring technology across a Trust,” Tas Hind adds, “is that it starts to inform, in real-time, where there are patient flow issues, and helps pinpoint where actions need taking to remove any bottlenecks. This, in turn, could lend itself to provide a panoramic view of Trust performance, where a control centre could highlight not only the performance of inbound and outbound traffic, but also the performance of healthcare providers and the estate, telling Trusts quickly where action is needed to resolve problems and maintain the efficiency of buildings, staff, and equipment. While this integrated view doesn’t yet exist in any UK hospital, it won’t be long before Estates Directors start looking more holistically at these site-wide challenges.” Tas Hind’s view is that, as well as ‘becoming the backbone of the day-to-day running of an estate’, such information can also start to inform the changes that need to be made to Trust facilities in the short-to-medium term, and the strategic opportunities in the long-term.


‘Better aligning’ Estates and IT She adds: “Integrating technology and estates can bring benefits around design, efficiency, and operations. To truly realise the power of technology in running NHS estates, however, we need to get away from the idea that they are separate silos. Nor should we think that the data collection from these facilities is a ‘back- office’ function, with little to do with the running of the estate.


“The good news is that some NHS Trusts have appointed directors with a joint responsibility for Estates and Facilities as well as IT – a shrewd move, as there is a realisation that technology is increasingly impacting and playing a role in shaping, designing, maintaining, and operating, the estate.”


Other practical steps


Other practical steps that Essentia believes estates directors can take ‘to align technology and estates more closely’ include: n Considering how integrated the IT function is with Estates & Facilities. n Ask whether they are being considered jointly during strategy discussions. n Being clear about the IT projects underway and the impact they could have on facilities. For instance, is the Trust implementing a new EPR system that may allow clinics to be run closer to home, or ‘virtual clinics’ to be run from the clinician’s home?


n Understanding current and future staffing models. For instance, is flexible working being considered, so that back-office staff can work from home, and use ‘hot desk’ facilities when on site?


n Asking whether the Trust is considering using technology to design, reconfigure, or extend, new facilities?


n Questioning whether the Trust is implementing, or willing to consider deploying, solutions that can track facilities for energy efficiency, usage, and patient flow.


n Considering whether there are opportunities to use data captured in the systems to predict short, medium, and long-term requirements.


hej


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