Academic program models for undergraduate biomedical engineering

There is a proliferation of medical devices across the globe for the diagnosis and therapy of diseases. Biomedical engineering (BME) plays a significant role in healthcare and advancing medical technologies thus creating a substantial demand for biomedical engineers at undergraduate and graduate levels. There has been a surge in undergraduate programs due to increasing demands from the biomedical industries to cover many of their segments from bench to bedside. With the requirement of multidisciplinary training within allottable duration, it is indeed a challenge to design a comprehensive standardized undergraduate BME program to suit the needs of educators across the globe. This paper's objective is to describe three major models of undergraduate BME programs and their curricular requirements, with relevant recommendations to be applicable in institutions of higher education located in varied resource settings. Model 1 is based on programs to be offered in large research-intensive universities with multiple focus areas. The focus areas depend on the institution's research expertise and training mission. Model 2 has basic segments similar to those of Model 1, but the focus areas are limited due to resource constraints. In this model, co-op/internship in hospitals or medical companies is included which prepares the graduates for the work place. In Model 3, students are trained to earn an Associate Degree in the initial two years and they are trained for two more years to be BME's or BME Technologists. This model is well suited for the resource-poor countries. All three models must be designed to meet applicable accreditation requirements. The challenges in designing undergraduate BME programs include manpower, facility and funding resource requirements and time constraints. Each academic institution has to carefully analyze its short term and long term requirements. In conclusion, three models for BME programs are described based on large universities, colleges, and community colleges. Model 1 is suitable for research-intensive universities. Models 2 and 3 can be successfully implemented in higher education institutions with low and limited resources with appropriate guidance and support from international organizations. The models will continually evolve mainly to meet the industry needs.