ELECTRICAL SAFETY
muscular paralysis and respiratory arrest, while slightly higher levels can trigger ventricular fibrillation. Remarkably, even microampere-level currents (10 µA) applied to sensitive regions of the heart may result in hearth failure. Although it is often assumed that
advancing technology automatically makes medical devices safer and more compatible, the reality is more complex. Leakage currents can still occur in both new and old equipment, caused by insulation faults, poor connections, or component failures. The rapid pace of development, combined with the increasing number of interconnected systems, can introduce new vulnerabilities in itself. Reliable and proactive monitoring is therefore essential to anticipate and address faults before they compromise patient and staff safety. Relying solely on residual current devices
(RCDs) is not sufficient. They act only after a fault has occurred, shutting down entire fuse groups without advance warning – an unacceptable risk in environments where continuity of supply is vital.
International standards for Group 2 medical locations IEC 60364-7-710 is the primary international standard for electrical installations in medical locations. It defines the requirements for Group 2 environments and mandates the use of medical IT systems with insulation monitoring devices (IMDs). In Europe, the harmonised version EN 60364-7-710 applies, ensuring consistent requirements across EU member states. Insulation monitoring is therefore
compulsory in operating theatres, ICUs and other Group 2 locations. The medical IT system provides an uninterrupted power supply during the first insulation fault, which is detected by the IMD and signalled through both visual and audible alarms. The system consists of a medical isolation transformer and the IMD, which must comply with IEC/EN 61557-8. For fault location, IEC/EN 61557-9 defines the requirements for insulation fault location systems (IFLS). In practice, this means that Group 2 locations must be designed not only for safe operation under normal conditions, but also for resilience against insulation faults, with staff immediately alerted and able to act. National regulations may complement or supplement these international and European standards and must also be respected.
India – expanding capacity in a growing healthcare system: electrical installations in medical locations In recent years, there has been a significant increase in accidents in hospitals, especially in high-risk medical locations such as Intensive Care Units (ICUs), Neonatal Intensive Care Units
72
Electrical safety awareness is being actively promoted in India through professional events, like the ELECRAMA exhibition, and training programmes.
(NICUs) and Operating Theatres (OTs) where patient evacuation is challenging. Detailed studies reveal that most of these accidents are due to the non-operation of protective devices during overcurrent or fault conditions. The studies also show that protective measures such as equipotential bonding are rarely implemented or maintained in medical locations. As a leading global destination for
medical tourism, India’s healthcare sector must improve the safety of electrical installations and maintain standards comparable to those of Western countries.
The legal framework for electrical safety Safety requirements in medical locations were first introduced in the National Electrical Code (NEC) of 1985 (SP 30, Part 3, Section 4). This code included provisions for system earthing (TN-S & IT), disconnection times, touch voltage limits, continuity of supply, supplementary equipotential bonding and requirements for oxygen-rich areas. The NEC 2011 elaborated on these requirements with illustrations for clarity, while the NEC 2023 further refined them, classifying locations into Group 1 and Group 2 and aligning the requirements with IEC 60364-7-710.
Implementation challenges The implementation of electrical safety in Indian hospitals remains a major challenge. There is no agency to enforce or verify compliance, leading to widespread non- implementation and a depletion of knowledge. Most hospitals are accredited under systems designed to improve patient safety and care, but electrical safety is not included in these frameworks. Instead, practices such as the thermal imaging of panels – not recognised in the NEC – are often emphasised, further diverting attention from critical safety measures. Earthing practices present another
problem. While the NEC recommends TN-
S systems for general applications and IT systems for Group 2 locations, unrecognised alternatives are commonly used causing dangerous failures. Global medical equipment manufacturers often demand separate ‘earth pits’ with a resistance of £ 1 W for biomedical equipment – a non-standard practice that conflicts with equipotential bonding and compromises patient and staff safety. Often, guarantees and warranties are linked to this requirement, resulting in hospital management refusing to implement supplementary equipotential bonding. As a result, one of the most important protective measures against electric shock in Group 1 and Group 2 locations is routinely neglected. The use of medical IT systems is still
rare, although some are implemented in modular operating theatres or integrated with UPS systems. Monitoring the continuity of PE conductors in such systems is particularly important due to the frequent confusion in protective earthing practices.
Additional safety considerations Public utilities or distribution companies supply most medical establishments and rely on multiple backup diesel generators. The capacity of these sources varies widely, which in turn influences circuit impedance. Under such conditions, implementing automatic disconnection is difficult. The use of a three-phase UPS without isolation for single-phase loads adds further complexity. The NEC 2023 introduced requirements
for initial and periodic verification. In existing hospitals, conducting such verification is difficult, as switching off the power is often not feasible. Nevertheless, several new hospitals have already adopted initial verification, ensuring compliance before commissioning – a significant improvement.
IFHE DIGEST 2026
Photo by Cape Electric
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 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104
