The Biomedical Engineering Handbook: Second Edition
The Biomedical Engineering Handbook: Second Edition
The Biomedical Engineering Handbook: Second Edition
"Swamy Laxminarayan, Joseph D. Bronzino, Jan E. W. Beneken, Shiro Usai, Richard D. Jones"
The Biomedical Engineering Handbook: Second Edition.
Ed. Joseph D. Bronzino
Boca Raton: CRC Press LLC, 2000
APPENDIX
A.1
Joseph D. Bronzino
Trinity College/Biomedical
Engineering Alliance for
Connecticut (BEACON)
Jan E. W. Beneken
Eindhoven University of Technology
Shiro Usai
Toyohashi University of Technology
Richard D. Jones
Christchurch Hospital
A.2
Summary
Professionals have been defined as an aggregate of people finding identity in sharing values and skills
absorbed during a common course of intensive training. Parsons [1954] stated that one determines
whether or not individuals are professionals by examining whether or not they have internalized certain
given professional values. Friedson [1971] redefined Parsons definition by noting that a professional is
someone who has internalized professional values and is to be recruited and licensed on the basis of his
or her technical competence. Furthermore, he pointed out that professionals generally accept scientific
standards in their work, restrict their work activities to areas in which they are technically competent,
avoid emotional involvement, cultivate objectivity in their work, and put their clients interests before
their own.
The concept of a profession that manages technology encompasses three occupational models: science,
business, and profession. Of particular interest in the contrast between science and profession. Science
is seen as the pursuit of knowledge, its value hinging on providing evidence and communicating with
colleagues. Profession, on the other hand, is viewed as providing a service to clients who have problems
they cannot handle themselves. Science and profession have in common the exercise of some knowledge,
skill, or expertise. However, while scientists practice their skills and report their results to knowledgeable
colleagues, professionalssuch as lawyers, physicians, and engineersserve lay clients. To protect both
the professional and the client from the consequences of the laypersons lack of knowledge, the practice
of the profession is regulated through such formal institutions as state licensing. Both professionals and
scientists must persuade their clients to accept their findings. Professionals endorse and follow a specific
code of ethics to serve society. On the other hand, scientists move their colleagues to accept their findings
through persuasion [Goodman, 1989].
Consider, for example, the medical profession. Its members are trained in caring for the sick, with the
primary goal of healing them. These professionals not only have a responsibility of the creation, development, and implementation of that tradition, they also are expected to provide a service to the public,
within limits, without regard of self-interest. To ensure proper service, the profession itself closely
monitors licensing and certification. Thus medical professionals themselves may be regarded as a mechanism of social control. However, this does not mean that other facets of society are not involved in
exercising oversight and control over physicians in their practice of medicine.
Professional Development. One can determine the status of professionalization by noting the occurrence of six crucial events: (1) the first training school, (2) the first university school, (3) the first local
professional association, (4) the first national professional association, (5) the first state license law, and
(6) the first formal code of ethics [Wilensky, 1964; Goodman, 1989; Bronzino, 1992].
The early appearances of training school and the university affiliation underscore the importance of
the cultivation of a knowledge base. The strategic innovative role of the universities and early teachers
lies in linking knowledge to practice and creating a rational for exclusive jurisdiction. Those practitioners
pushing for prescribed training then form a professional association. The association defines the task of
the profession: raising the quality of recruits, redefining their function to permit the use of less technically
skilled people to perform the more routine, less involved tasks, and managing internal and external
conflicts. In the process, internal conflict may arise between those committed to established procedures
and newcomers committed to change and innovation. At this stage, some form of professional regulation,
such as licensing or certification, surfaces because of a belief that it will ensure minimum standards for
the profession, enhance status, and protect the layperson in the process.
The latest area of professional development is the establishment of a formal code of ethics, which
usually includes rules to exclude the unqualified and unscrupulous practitioners, rules to reduce internal
competition, and rules to protect clients and emphasize the ideal service to society. A code of ethics
usually comes at the end of the professionalization process.
In biomedical engineering, all six critical steps mentioned above have been clearly taken. Therefore,
biomedical engineering is definitely a profession. It is important here to note the professional associations
across the globe that represent the interest of professionals in the field.
A.1
Globalization of biomedical engineering (BME) activities is underscored by the fact that there are several
major professional BME societies currently operational throughout the world. The various countries and
continents to have provided concerted action groups in biomedical engineering are Europe, the Americas, Canada, and the Far East, including Japan and Australia. while all these organizations share in the
common pursuit of promoting biomedical engineering, all national societies are geared to serving the
needs of their local memberships. The activities of some of the major professional organizations are
described below.
Association for the Advancement of Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies, (11) the Society for
Biomaterials, (12) Orthopedic Research Society, (13) American Society of Biomechanics, and (14) American Association of Physicist in Medicine. In an effort to unify all the disparate components of the
biomedical engineering community in the United States as represented by these various societies, the
American Institute for Medical and Biological Engineers (AIMBE) was created in 1992. The AIMBE is the
result of a 3-year effort funded by the National Science Foundation and led by a joint steering committee
established by the Alliance of Engineering in Medicine and Biology and the U.S. National Committee on
Biomechanics. The primary goal of AIMBE is to serve as an umbrella organization for the purpose of
unifying the bioengineering community, addressing public policy issues, identifying common themes of
reflection and proposals for action, and promoting the engineering approach in societys effort to enhance
health and quality of life through the judicious use of technology [Galletti, 1994].
AIMBE serves its role through four working divisions: (1) the Council of Societies, consisting of the
11 constituent organizations mentioned above, (2) the Academic Programs Council, currently consisting
of 46 institutional charter members, (3) the Industry Council, and (4) the College Fellows. In addition
to these councils, there are four commissions, Education, Public Awareness, Public Policy, and Liaisons.
With its inception in 1992, AIMBE is a relatively young institution trying to establish its identity as an
umbrella organization for medical and biologic engineering in the United States. As summarized by two
of the founding officials of the AIMBE, Profs Nerem and Galletti:
What we are all doing, collectively, is defining a focus for biological and medical engineering. In a
society often confused by technophobic tendencies, we will try to assert what engineering can do for
biology, for medicine, for health care and for industrial development, We should be neither shy, nor
arrogant, nor self-centered. The public has great expectations from engineering and technology in
terms of their own health and welfare. They are also concerned about side effects, unpredictable
consequences and the economic costs. Many object to science for the sake of science, resent exaggerated
or empty promises of benefit to society, and are shocked by sluggish or misdirected flow from basic
research to useful applications. These issues must be addressed by the engineering and medical communities. For more information, contact the Executive Office, AIMBE, 1901 Pennsylvania Avenue,
N.W., Suite 401, Washington DC 200063405 (Tel: 2024969660; fax: 2024668489; email:
AIMBE@aol.com).
universities and industries, and organizing special seminars and conferences. The information dissemination of all scientific progress is done through the Journal of Innovation and Technology in Biology and
Medicine. For more information, contact the French National Federation of Bioengineering, Coordinateur
de la Federation Francaise des Poles GBM, Pole GBM Aquitaine-Site Bordeaux-Montesquieu, Centre de
Resources, 33651 Martillac Cedex, France.
Membership in the ICSU implies recognition of the particular field of activity as a field of science.
Although ICSU is heralded as a body of pure scientific unions to the exclusion of cross and multidisciplinary organizations and those of an engineering nature, IUPESM, attained its associate membership
in the ICSU in the mid-1980s. The various other international scientific unions that are members of the
ICSU include the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (IUBMB), the International Union of Biological Sciences (IUBS), the International Brain Research Organization (IBRO), and
the International Union of Pure and Applied Biophysics (IUPAB). The IEEE is an affiliated commission
of the IUPAB and is represented through the Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society [ICSU Year
Book, 1994]. For more information, contact the Secretariat, International Council of Scientific Unions,
51 Boulevard de Montmorency, 75016 Paris, France. (Tel: 145250329; fax: 142889431; email:
icsu@paris7.jussieu.fr)
international interactions, the presidents of the IEEE, EMBS, and the IFMBE met with representatives
of biomedical engineering societies from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Columbia, and Mexico in 1991 [Robinson, 1991]. This meeting resulted in the formation of an independent Latin American Regional Council
of Biomedical Engineering, known by its spanish and portugese acronym as CORAL (Consejo Regional
de Ingenieria Biomedica para Americana Latina). Both the EMBS and the IFMBE are the founding
sponsoring members of the CORAL. The main objectives of CORAL are (1) to foster, promote and
encourage the development of research, student programs, publications, professional activities, and joint
efforts and (2) to act as a communication channel for national societies within Latin American region
and to improve communication between societies, laboratories, hospitals, industries, universities, and
other groups in Latin America and the Caribbean. Since its inception, CORAL has already provided the
centerpiece for bioengineering activities in Latin America through special concerted scientific meetings
and closer society interactions both in a national and international sense. For more information, contact
the Secretary General, CORAL, Centro Investigacion y de Estudios, Avanzados Duel Ipn, Departamento
Ingenieria Electrica, Seccion Bioelectronica, Av. Instituto Politecnico Nacional 2508, Esg. Av. Ticoman
07000, Mexico Apartado Postal 14740, Mexico.
A.2
Summary
The field of biomedical engineering, which originated as a professional group on medical electronics in
the late fifties, has grown from a few scattered individuals to very well-established organization. There
are approximately 50 national societies throughout the world serving an increasingly growing community
of biomedical engineers. The scope of biomedical engineering today is enormously diverse. Over the
years, many new disciplines such as molecular biology, genetic engineering, computer-aided drug design,
nanotechnology, and so on, which were once considered alien to the field, are now new challenges a
biomedical engineer faces. Professional societies play a major role in bringing together members of this
diverse community in pursuit of technology applications for improving the health and quality of life of
human beings. Intersocietal cooperations and collaborations, both at national and international levels,
are more actively fostered today through professional organizations such as the IFMBE, AIMBE, CORAL,
and the IEEE. These developments are strategic to the advancement of the professional status of biomedical engineers. Some of the self-imposed mandates the professional societies should continue to
pursue include promoting public awareness, addressing public policy issues that impact research and
development of biologic and medical products, establishing close liaisons with developing countries,
encouraging educational programs for developing scientific and technical expertise in medical and
biologic engineering, providing a management paradigm that ensures efficiency and economy of health
care technology [Wald, 1993], and participating in the development of new job opportunities for biomedical engineers.
References
Fard TB. 1994. International Council of Scientific Unions Year Book, Paris, ICSU.
Friedson E. 1971. Profession of Medicine. New York, Dodd, Mead.
Galletti PM, Nerem RM. 1994. The Role of Bioengineering in Biotechnology. AIMBE Third Annual Event.
Goodman G. 1989. The profession of clinical engineering. J Clin Eng 14:27.
Parsons T. 1954. Essays in Sociological Theories. Glencoe, Ill, Free Press.
Robinson CR. 1991. Presidents column. IEEE Eng Med Bio Mag.
Wald A. 1993. Health care: Reform and technology (editors note). IEEE Eng Med Bio Mag 12:3.