Problems with systems of medical equipment provision: an evaluation in Honduras, Rwanda and Cambodia identifies opportunities to strengthen healthcare systems
- 101 Downloads
A substantial amount of equipment is out-of-service in the developing world. Out-of-service equipment limits access to important medical procedures. We measured the amount of out-of-service donated, purchased and loaned medical equipment and documented the barriers to returning them to service in hospitals in Honduras, Rwanda and Cambodia. From 2010 to 2012, we completed a cross-sectional survey of 3421 pieces of medical equipment in five departments from 64 hospitals. The time since arrival, source (donated, purchased or loaned), service contract status and functionality were determined. For any partially or non-functional equipment, the barriers to placing the equipment back into service were documented. In the first year, donated equipment was significantly more likely to be out-of-service than purchased and loaned equipment combined (p < 0.01), where the latter presumably gets more hospital scrutiny before acquisition. But, purchased equipment was more likely to be out-of-service than donated equipment 5 to 6 years after arrival (p < 0.05). Loaned equipment had the highest in-service rates. Service contracts did not significantly decrease out-of-service rates, except for high-complexity equipment (p < 0.001). The largest barrier to placing equipment back into service, according to technicians, was access to spare parts, accessories and consumables. Given the considerable out-of-service rates, the most sustainable and efficacious points of intervention could be the training of local technicians and leasing (rather than donating or purchasing) equipment in order to improve the availability of medical equipment and thus increase access to medical procedures.
KeywordsDonations Low-resource Medical equipment Service contracts
This work was funded by the GE Foundation.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors hereby declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 2.Cheng M. An overview of medical device policy and regulation. World Bank, HNP Brief # 8. Washington DC; 2007.Google Scholar
- 3.Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Multilateral aid report. Enabling Effective Development. Paris; 2012.Google Scholar
- 4.Mullally S. Clinical engineering effectiveness in developing world hospitals. Doctoral Thesis, Carleton University; 2008.Google Scholar
- 5.Mullally S. Making it work: A toolkit for medical equipment donations to low-resource settings. London: THET Publications; 2013.Google Scholar
- 7.Catholic Health Association of the United States. How Effective Surplus Donation Can Relieve Human Suffering. Washington DC: CHA Medical Surplus Donation Study; 2011.Google Scholar
- 8.World Health Organization. Barriers to innovation in the field of medical devices. Medical Devices: Managing the Mismatch. Geneva; 2010.Google Scholar
- 9.Hockel D, Hamilton T. Understanding Total Cost of Ownership. Exec Insight. 2012;3:44–7.Google Scholar
- 10.Humatem. Kitting Out a Health Facility: 5 Steps to Success. Les Houches: Humatem Publications; 2013a.Google Scholar
- 11.The Partnership for Quality Medical Donations. PQMD Guidelines for Quality Medical Product Donations. PQMD Guidelines and Standards. Maryland; 2014.Google Scholar
- 12.World Health Organization. Medical device donations: considerations for solicitation and provision. WHO Medical Device Technical Series. Geneva; 2011.Google Scholar
- 13.Gaertner H. Equipment support for operating in emergency and post emergency situations. Equip'Aid Conference, Humatem, European Hospital and Healthcare Federation, French Hospital Federation, Chamonix; 2013.Google Scholar
- 14.Dyro JF. Clinical Engineering Handbook. Biomedical Engineering Series. Massachusetts: Academic Press; 2004.Google Scholar
- 15.Humatem. From the maintenance man to the biomedical operator for optimal use of all the medical equipment. Les Houches: Humatem Publications; 2013b.Google Scholar
- 16.Malkin RA, Perry L. Evaluation of the impact of a new biomedical equipment technician curriculum in Rwanda. Appropriate Healthcare Technologies for Developing Countries, 7th International Conference. London: IET; 2012.Google Scholar