Report: IFMBE Working Group for European Activities
Europe is actually split into two blocks, into the block of those countries which are members of the European Union (EU) and the block of the non-EU members. Although both blocks are not homogeneous regarding the political structure, economic level, social and cultural situation of their members, there is no doubt that the means in all relevant aspects is more advanced and higher developed in the block with EU members than in the block with non-EU members. Furthermore, there is some evidence that this gap between the two blocks is becoming larger instead of smaller.
This splitting is also reflected by the European BME scenery. In most of the countries with EU-membership BME is well established and mainly represented by national BME societies which are members of the IFMBE. The situation is different in the block with non-EU members. Only some of them have national BME societies (mainly those countries which are on the list of candidates for EU membership in the near future). In many countries of the non-EU block, mainly in the very poor countries in Eastern Europe, BME is not at all represented in an organised form, e.g. by national BME societies. In those countries, BME in education and research has been realised, if at all, on an individual rather than on an institutional level.
The Working Group for European Activities has been concerned to help the colleagues in those countries to find a way for self-organising. The updated and extended European BME network that is available via the Internet and provides much invaluable information on colleagues, institutes, national societies, work in progress, research activities etc. is one of these measures for help.
Another measure in this regard is the first joint meeting of all European IFMBE members in Vienna (EMBEC’99: 4-7 November, 1999). The most important objective of that conference is to bring together the whole European BME community (and, of course, also many colleagues from outside Europe). EMBEC’99 is the platform to meet the challenge of biomedical engineering and in particular to advance medicine and healthcare in Europe through technology. It can be hoped that a successful EMBEC’99 may contribute to bridge the gap between the EU and the non-EU blocks. But to achieve this objective the request for co-operation and partnership must be met, at the individual, institutional or national level. It is an urgent appeal to countries with well-established BME societies to provide financial support to colleagues from the poor countries in order to render possible their participation in EMBEC’99. The EU donates funds for co-operation programmes such as TEMPUS. The organisers of EMBEC’99 are still attempting to obtain some money from the EU that can be spent on Central and Eastern European participants in the Vienna meeting.
BME in Europe is in a difficult situation since it has to define its mission and identity. The scope of BME ranges from professional activities and objectives (e.g. clinical engineering) to scientific research in advanced fields such as cellular and tissue engineering or biosensor technology. The EU provides funding for scientific projects that meet the criteria set out in the R&D programs belonging to the so-called Framework Program on R&D of the European Union (the newest of these the Fifth Framework has just been launched). It seems, however, that BME aspects will not be separately considered in that programme. It is obvious that the IFMBE cannot be a partner of the EU authorities for discussing details of European research programmes. The present organisational authority and autonomy does not either sufficiently qualify the Working Group for European Activities as a partner for the EU authorities. It may be necessary to think of a better organisational qualification of the Working Group in the near future. It is obvious that other organisations are more effective in co-operating with EU authorities than the IFMBE.
Another plan that is followed by the EU authorities is concerned with the adjustment of educational programmes, especially on the postgraduate level, standardisation of training, accreditation and certification. It can be assumed that those efforts will result in measures that can be compared to the introduction of harmonised standards within the EU, with the introduction of the CE mark for medical devices and with the establishment of notified bodies. There is no doubt that those efforts will lead to a higher degree of homogeneity within the EU, and that BME will be affected in many ways. However, on the other hand the difference to the block with non-EU nations will become larger. It will be one of the most important tasks for any European IFMBE sub-organisation to bridge that gap.
Owing to the split situation in Europe, BME is strongly concerned and confronted with many tasks and requests. The IFMBE has the mission of representing the BME community worldwide must consider the special European situation and also whether the Working Group for European Activities is able to respond to this challenge in its present organisational form. This form must be adjusted in such a way that the new organisation can become the platform and promoter for future BME development in the whole of Europe. A major requirement is that effective support can be provided to those countries which want to establish national BME societies and national BME research and educational programmes.
Professor Dr. H. Hutten
Graz, Austria, Chairman, Working Group for European Activities
Email: hutten@ibmt.tu-graz.ac.at