A recent hearing in Vermont shows lawmakers are asking more pointed questions about medical device repair. What happens next may depend on whether HTM professionals speak up.
By Alyx Arnett
Vermont is taking a run at medical device right to repair.
A bill called H.160 would require manufacturers to provide hospitals and independent servicers with the parts, tools, documentation, and training needed to repair equipment—on what it defines as “fair and reasonable terms.”
It was the focus of a hearing before the Vermont House Commerce Committee a few weeks ago. If it passes, it would be the first state law to cover all medical devices that need servicing.
I spoke with a few of the people who testified at the hearing, and the takeaway wasn’t that this bill is guaranteed to go anywhere. It was that, for once, lawmakers seemed to be engaging with the issue in a more practical way.
Binseng Wang, ScD, CCE, BSI Health Technology Consulting, said he was “truly impressed” by the level of interest from committee members and their focus on understanding how these challenges affect patient care. “It was clear that they want to do the right thing for the Vermont residents by considering all the facts and concerns,” he said.
That doesn’t mean it’s moving forward. Everyone I spoke with was clear about how unpredictable this process is.
“It’s truly hard to get laws passed,” said Gay Gordon-Byrne, executive director of The Repair Association, who also testified.
She pointed to multiple examples of similar bills in other states that gained traction and then stalled out—sometimes because of politics, sometimes because of unrelated issues getting tied in.
J. Scot Mackeil, CBET, senior anesthesia BMET at Massachusetts General Hospital, who also testified, pointed to another factor working against bills like this: the imbalance in resources between industry groups and hospital-based stakeholders pushing for repair access.
At the same time, they all pointed to a few reasons this bill stands out.
One is the scope. The bill “includes equipment that hasn’t yet been directly involved” in right-to-repair legislation, Gordon-Byrne said, noting that powered wheelchairs are now commonly included in such bills but not medical devices broadly.
Another is who’s backing it. Nathan Proctor, senior director of US PIRG Campaign for the Right to Repair, notes support from the Vermont Association for Hospitals and Health Systems.
“Hospital support was the reason that earlier bills made progress, so that’s a very important development in this bill’s prospects,” he said.
But he said that’s only part of it.
“The key to success is getting more people engaged—especially people in the HTM field,” Proctor said.
Wang made a similar point.
“While it is, in general, desirable to have state or regional HTM associations to express their opinions directly to their legislators, it is not uncommon that a single professional can swing the pendulum by explaining the challenges that he/she experienced to persons with decision power,” he said.
Part of the issue, Mackeil said, is that a lot of what HTM professionals deal with every day isn’t well understood by policymakers. He pointed to public records and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) analyses, including findings from the FDA’s review of medical device servicing, which found that many of the safety concerns raised about independent or in-house repair haven’t been substantiated. Even so, those arguments can still resonate with lawmakers who aren’t familiar with that body of work, he said.
Mackeil pointed to a more direct lever as well. “HTM professionals function as gatekeepers,” he said. “A consistent, profession-wide stance—no service documentation, no parts access, no diagnostic codes means no demos and no sales—would materially shift the landscape if broadly adopted.”
For HTM professionals in Vermont, it comes down to reaching out to a legislator and explaining what it actually takes to do the job without access to parts, tools, or documentation.
And while this bill is specific to Vermont, the outcome won’t be.
If it passes, it creates a model other states can point to. If it doesn’t, it becomes another example of how difficult it is to move this issue forward.
ID 18044108 © Sphraner | Dreamstime.com
Alyx Arnett is chief editor of 24×7 Magazine. Questions or comments? Email [email protected].
