do believe the new name is very vague and will
lead to more confusion for the public at large,
for professionals to identify, and will serve on-
ly to allow companies responsible for providing
the service to hire more unskilled service-men/wo-
men. It is a diservice to the profession. The new name invokes, in fact, compiled data on me-
dical information, rather than the actual servi-
cing of the machineries.

I'm from the days of names like Medical Maintenance, Biomedical eng...I think it is important to keep some kind of identifier in the name that a person off the street would know what the Dept does. Clinical Eng, Biomedical Eng, work pretty good but Technology Mgt leads the person to believe the dept is inventing something rather than repairing. If you have you own business the name is very important and needs to tell what you do with out any doubt. Just when all the nurses in the hospital are used to calling "biomed" when they have a problem you are going to change that. Most dept that manage other modalities branch them off when they get too big anyway. Just keep the name Biomedical Equipment Management or Biomedical Eng, Biomedical something please.

To me management means manage, what are they forgetting the repair side of our job. They really have way to much time on there hands to come up with such a name. I agree with Ken keep the Biomedical in the name I started in the field in the late 70's as a Medical Maintenance Technician, then to Biomedical Engineer, then to Clinical Engineer which I do not mind but this new one is just not right.

New name sounds like an IT person or Insurance Provider. We will continue to use Biomedical or Clinical Engineer, although I never liked the Clinical Title as it sounds "Clinical" We use Biomedical Technolgist for our Biomedical Equipment staff and Imaging Specialist for our
Imaging equipment, X-ray, Nucmed, CVL Lab, Radiation Oncolgy etc.and Lab Specialist for that dept equipment.These are names decided on by Trimedx and Ascension Health consisting of over 100 Hospital locations.

I din't like the name, I believe it will cause more confusion to those outside the career field as it does not say clearly what we do. It sounds to close to IT titles and it sounds like we sit in an office not out in the facilities doing the hands on work. This title is just one of the facets of what we do. I would prefer to see the name retain "Biomed or Biomedical" as that is something most healthcare workers currently identify with. My suggestion would be "Biomedical Equipment Technology Management"

I have been very disappointed in AAMI for a long time. It is my opinion that this "job" whatever you want to call it, can not be labeled a "profession" until you are required to be credentialed.
Just like the nursing profession a 100 years ago went through. Today, in my State you must be Certified just to wipe patients butts.
I was certified over 20 years ago and you guys "in charge" have been putting the cart before the horse the whole time.

I think you will just confuse people more than they already are. 5 years ago we had to stop answer the phone as Biomed and Answer as Clinicial Engineering. 5 years later people still ask is this Biomed! You are setting us up for more confusion that is not necessary, change the name back to Biomed or at least include that in the title. I think AAMI needs to focus on what we do as an organization and not worry about a Title Name, We are a service organization we are here to make sure that the Equipment is working and here to help the staff fix their issues when needed. Leave things along and focus on Promoting us as who we are and what we do, not being creative with a name change!

I understand this first meeting was designed to come up with a new name that is 'forward thinking' and 'unifies' the profession under one name that all will recognize. That is a nice goal and I am sure much thought and effort went into this process to come up with HTM. In my opinion, the selection missed the mark and looks to take us a step backward into obscurity.
I would think changing our name, whatever that is where you work, is like trying to call a mechanic an 'automotive technology manager', a garbage collector a 'sanitation engineer', or a doctor a 'human physiology expert'. Makes something sound more important or gives it that 'extra nice' ring to it, but in the end, if your car is broken, you're going to call your 'mechanic'. My point is, no matter what name you try to come up with to describe us, others are going to call us what they are familiar with.
Deb Hoyt pointed out they still get calls to her shop asking if this is 'biomed' 5 years after they changed to 'clinical engineering'! I think people will get confused if they call the 'biomed shop' and someone answers 'this is healthcare technology management, may I help you?' I for one, would probably think I misdialed and got the IT shop!
My last analogy is this. If you got to the store to buy a TV, you will be offered something in LED, LCD, Plasma, 3D, internet ready, etc. but in the end, you will get it home, get it hooked up, and sit down to enjoy your favorite show on your new TV.
Same thing applies here. If a piece of 'healthcare technology' is broken where you work, isn't someone going to be looking for the 'biomed' to fix it?