by
Sean Ruck, Contributing Editor | August 01, 2014
From the August 2014 issue of HealthCare Business News magazine
Providers today have so many more options than they did in the past when it comes to parts and service. It’s fortunate, because the challenges they face are also much greater than they were in the past. With financial challenges, regulatory issues, staffing concerns and of course, the need to stay abreast of new technology, the lines between departments are blurring and fewer people are expected to get more done with less resources.
There is no one right answer to solve all the problems and different providers approach problems in different ways. Some large providers have economy of scale working to their advantage and can benefit from in-house services, while others can’t or choose not to go in-house.
Meanwhile, some smaller facilities feel they cannot afford OEM service or justify an in-house team, so they explore alternative service options. In some cases, whether large or small, hospitals might use a blend of all three.
It seems based on the professionals interviewed for this story that there is no hard and fast rule. Oftentimes, the choice is a reflection of the personality of the people in charge. Some people have a do-it-yourself mentality while others prefer leaving certain responsibilities to others as they focus on different tasks.
Although in-house service technicians are onsite and provide the fastest initial response time, unless the organization has that economy of scale, they likely need support from an outside service group.
In-house teams not only help to maintain equipment by keeping up with preventative maintenance, but they also serve to provide an immediate first look in the event of equipment failure. While not every facility may be large enough to justify a full-time in-house team, it’s a valid option for many. And in-house isn’t an all-or-nothing proposition. Many OEMs and ISOs work closely with in-house teams, providing training and support, in some cases even working with those professionals to help them become more self-sufficient and thereby take charge of more of their hospital’s service needs.
While alternative maintenance programs using risk-based assessment have been carried out for years, officially, it was against the rules to deviate from manufacturer recommendations for maintenance according to the requirements set forth by The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. But CMS, whether understaffed or unconcerned, didn’t go to great lengths to enforce the rules as long as hospitals were keeping the equipment in good order and had the documentation to support their risk-based maintenance decisions.
