OK - what you call the headwall is typically described in UK parlance as the bed head, and is covered in HTM 08-03 - Bedhead Services
For each of your examples, I could map the medical gas outlets, earthing points, lighting control, patient entertainment control, exam lamp and critical and normal sockets to a virtually identical set up in a UK or European Hospital
I mentioned the AIA Healthcare guides and the links to relevant NFPA and NEC Codes - and therein is the principal difference. Your USA experience will be based on a "by the code" approach - code says, you do. In the UK and Europe, we achieve much the same things but we use a much more pragmatic approach based on clinical risk assessment. We don't generally mandate number of branches, feeders, ATS etc - we just state the performance requirements (again, read HTM 06-01). From there we have a process of competent designers interpreting requirements objectives for a specific site based on particular assessment of clinical risk.
If we took a typical 500 bed acute hospital in the USA and in the UK, you would be surprised actually how similar the systems are - we just get there in a different way, which is generally quite normal based on the different approaches on either side of the Atlantic to many engineering challenges. Essentially, you guys rely on the "Code" - if the code says do it, you do it - we Brits however are more likely to adopt the approach of "Code is for the guidance of wise men, and the adherence of fools" - don't take that personally, it's just how we used to describe some of our American colleagues.
OK - what you call the headwall is typically described in UK parlance as the bed head, and is covered in HTM 08-03 - Bedhead Services
For each of your examples, I could map the medical gas outlets, earthing points, lighting control, patient entertainment control, exam lamp and critical and normal sockets to a virtually identical set up in a UK or European Hospital
I mentioned the AIA Healthcare guides and the links to relevant NFPA and NEC Codes - and therein is the principal difference. Your USA experience will be based on a "by the code" approach - code says, you do. In the UK and Europe, we achieve much the same things but we use a much more pragmatic approach based on clinical risk assessment. We don't generally mandate number of branches, feeders, ATS etc - we just state the performance requirements (again, read HTM 06-01). From there we have a process of competent designers interpreting requirements objectives for a specific site based on particular assessment of clinical risk.
If we took a typical 500 bed acute hospital in the USA and in the UK, you would be surprised actually how similar the systems are - we just get there in a different way, which is generally quite normal based on the different approaches on either side of the Atlantic to many engineering challenges. Essentially, you guys rely on the "Code" - if the code says do it, you do it - we Brits however are more likely to adopt the approach of "Code is for the guidance of wise men, and the adherence of fools" - don't take that personally, it's just how we used to describe some of our American colleagues.
