Maurice Dixon:
Technology needs to be applied with caution for the benefit of the specialists and patients, with the intelligent and empathetic support of the technologists, not just for the sake of technology. This is one issue the NHS needs to learn from having been driven to over prescription of drugs for the sake of the Pharma companies who just want the NHS to buy evermore quantities, and evermore expense drugs.
Technologists must not peddle the 'emperor's clothes' (De)illusions that new technology is always best and will always improve things, many technologies make things far worse if not designed and implemented properly - see many NHS IT systems. However, here seems to be an example of where technology can support training and refreshing of surgeon skills and developing new surgery techniques, pre-op practice and dry runs, etc, without putting patients lives at risk, thus, has a 'value chain enhancement' for surgeons and patients.
https://www.computerworlduk.com/applications/newcastle-hospital-turns-osso-vr-train-surgeons-3695729/?no1x1&utm_source=Daily&utm_medium=email&utm_term=image&utm_content=image&utm_campaign=Daily2904&elqTrack=true&bt_ee=A4rqAc%2FwqFvgeKV5mlG8TjvZrixgUNN8lAfw%2FgTuWWkJwG%2FKEnCuDeKz%2FKxnk9l3&bt_ts=1556549747127
As with all things new stuff, introduce slowly and with moderation, not just for the sake of new stuff, must be introduced properly with concepts, training, procedures, through-life support, proper budgets and resources, etc, etc, and it must 'add value' not just be the next 'must have' technology in the medical sector.
There is the overarching question whether the NHS can successfully keep up with developments in technology (in the real world) and successfully embrace it, or whether its structure and organisation, along with the mindsets of its staff, severely inhibit both aspects?
A scenario has stuck in my mind that in the early 1990s the medical staff in Russian hospitals were just as good (or even better) when it came to medical matters as their counterparts in Britain and western Europe, but Russian hospitals were technological timewarps barely any more advanced than those from the 1930s. The NHS is nowhere as extreme as this but a danger exists that medics will be unable to keep pace with developments in medicine unless they also keep pace with developments in technology.
I agree with you that technologists must not peddle the 'emperor's clothes' or just introduce technology for the sake of it without it achieving any benefits to the patients. However, will a situation arise in the future where the private healthcare sector will be better at keeping up with developments in technology; embracing technology in a way that results in the greatest benefit for the patient; and even leads in the R&D of developing new technology than the NHS does?
There is some evidence that before computer science was introduced as a National Curriculum subject, independent schools generally had more up to date computers than state schools did and were also better at deploying them for educational use than state schools were - even in subjects like music or design & technology. I do not think that it was purely difference in financial resources for independent schools vs state schools, but staff with better knowledge of how to use computers as an educational resource along with a structure and organisation of the school that enabled ideas to be implemented in practice.
Maurice Dixon:
Technology needs to be applied with caution for the benefit of the specialists and patients, with the intelligent and empathetic support of the technologists, not just for the sake of technology. This is one issue the NHS needs to learn from having been driven to over prescription of drugs for the sake of the Pharma companies who just want the NHS to buy evermore quantities, and evermore expense drugs.
Technologists must not peddle the 'emperor's clothes' (De)illusions that new technology is always best and will always improve things, many technologies make things far worse if not designed and implemented properly - see many NHS IT systems. However, here seems to be an example of where technology can support training and refreshing of surgeon skills and developing new surgery techniques, pre-op practice and dry runs, etc, without putting patients lives at risk, thus, has a 'value chain enhancement' for surgeons and patients.
https://www.computerworlduk.com/applications/newcastle-hospital-turns-osso-vr-train-surgeons-3695729/?no1x1&utm_source=Daily&utm_medium=email&utm_term=image&utm_content=image&utm_campaign=Daily2904&elqTrack=true&bt_ee=A4rqAc%2FwqFvgeKV5mlG8TjvZrixgUNN8lAfw%2FgTuWWkJwG%2FKEnCuDeKz%2FKxnk9l3&bt_ts=1556549747127
As with all things new stuff, introduce slowly and with moderation, not just for the sake of new stuff, must be introduced properly with concepts, training, procedures, through-life support, proper budgets and resources, etc, etc, and it must 'add value' not just be the next 'must have' technology in the medical sector.
There is the overarching question whether the NHS can successfully keep up with developments in technology (in the real world) and successfully embrace it, or whether its structure and organisation, along with the mindsets of its staff, severely inhibit both aspects?
A scenario has stuck in my mind that in the early 1990s the medical staff in Russian hospitals were just as good (or even better) when it came to medical matters as their counterparts in Britain and western Europe, but Russian hospitals were technological timewarps barely any more advanced than those from the 1930s. The NHS is nowhere as extreme as this but a danger exists that medics will be unable to keep pace with developments in medicine unless they also keep pace with developments in technology.
I agree with you that technologists must not peddle the 'emperor's clothes' or just introduce technology for the sake of it without it achieving any benefits to the patients. However, will a situation arise in the future where the private healthcare sector will be better at keeping up with developments in technology; embracing technology in a way that results in the greatest benefit for the patient; and even leads in the R&D of developing new technology than the NHS does?
There is some evidence that before computer science was introduced as a National Curriculum subject, independent schools generally had more up to date computers than state schools did and were also better at deploying them for educational use than state schools were - even in subjects like music or design & technology. I do not think that it was purely difference in financial resources for independent schools vs state schools, but staff with better knowledge of how to use computers as an educational resource along with a structure and organisation of the school that enabled ideas to be implemented in practice.
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site