In August 2015 we wrote about the implications of the new AS/NZS4187 standard on office based healthcare facilities. It is the second best read article on our blog and we have now created snapshot video that covers the main points. See below.
In August 2015 we wrote about the confusion about the new standard AS4187 versus the previous standard AS4185 in dental practices and office based health care services. The short video addresses that.
The best read post on our blog is the one we published way back in August 2015 on the topic of AS4187 product families. It remains very popular so we've created this very short video for you that you may like to share with your friends and colleagues.
I recently attended the 37th Annual Dental Congress in Melbourne and it was fantastic to catch up with the dental community and talk about the infection control issues that affect them. We had many visitors to our booth and had several enriching discussions with progressive thinking delegates who were passionate about infection control.
One discussion in particular caught my interest, as the delegate had very interesting views regarding the Spaulding Classification and how it was applied in dentistry. Our discussion centred around whether the classification and AS4815 were still relevant and whether AS4187 should be the "go to" standard for office based dental practices instead.
Blog posts and downloads related to product families blogs are by far the most accessed content on our website. By a long way.
And it’s with good reason. The concept of product families can be extremely complicated and confusing.
Last month our Company attended the WHFSS conference in Brisbane as an exhibitor. While I was there, I had a number of interesting conversations with delegates who were using paper based tracking systems and were feeling that the new requirements of AS4187:2014 were going to substantially increase the amount of paper work that they would need to complete.
Some delegates were quite anxious that their paper based system just wouldn’t cut it anymore. Hence their discussions with us.
Just yesterday, I received an email informing me that the AS 4187 compliance deadline of December this year had been extended.The news surprised me. Our subscription to SAI Global Standards watch would normally have alerted us if there had been an amendment in the standard. So I searched high and low on the SAI Global site and then Standards Australia and then the old trusty Google.
However I was unable to find anything. So I mentioned it to our Office Manager who then went off and tried her luck with Google.
We've all had the experience of sitting in waiting room for what seems and absolute eternity waiting to see a medical professional. Flicking through outdated, dog eared magazines, keeping an eye on the queue, feeling nervous and hoping that it’s your turn next.
It’s crazy really, because not only does it create discomfort and dissatisfaction with patients, it also costs the practice significantly in terms of customer satisfaction and higher operating costs.
But why does this happen and, more to the point, how can it be improved?
Traditional EHR systems do not meet ophthalmologists' functional requirements. This is what an August 2011 report published by the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) says.
The paper which is titled ‘Special Requirements for Electronic Health Record Systems in Ophthalmology’ argues that the field of ophthalmology has a number of ‘specialty specific’ requirements that are not taken into consideration by traditional EHR systems. Its abstract reads: