CA EMT changes?

C

chriso

Forum Crew Member
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I heard from a friend that there is going to be some changes to registry and training. Now he also told me this means I will have to take a refresher course and re take national registry within 3 years? Is this true? I know there was going to be some change in the curriculum but didn't know it would affect my national registry as long as I do my continuing education.
 
Im not sure about the basic level. But for NREMT-P there are going to be some major changes in what they require of schools. There is going to be a "bridge class" that you will have to take and you have 3 or 4 years to get that done in order to keep your registry. They have not come out with any details for the bridge class yet. Its not a rumor. They do plan on doing this but none of the changes are offical yet
 
got ya. Now with that bridge class will national reggistry be required again? That's my main concern. I guess ill wait to go to paramedic school until these changes take place.
 
Im not sure on that one. I dont even know if they've gotten that far into their plan. I wondered the same thing and havent been able to get an answer. I dont think you'll have to retake registry per say. I could see the class possibly having some skills that you have to be signed off on during the class but I would imagine that any testing they want would be conducted during the class.

I wouldnt put off going to paramedic if its something you want to do. Unless your program would finish before Jan 2013 you'd probably end up under the new rules anyways. If they do alot of what they're talking about the cost of class and time involved is going to go up. If you have the time and money I'd say get it done now. Plus if they do make the changes you'll have a few years to take the class to keep registry
 
Does ayone have a link to any official talk about this subject?

Thanks, Ramathorn

Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch 3G using Tapatalk
 
Dont have any links but I've read the Emails that have been sent out to the directors of ems programs
 
There are supposedly changes being made everywhere for basics. There are rumours going around about being about to test blood sugar, being allowed to intubate, etc. There is nothing definitive yet, but I would hope there will be some formal announcement about it before the end of this year.
 
I'd be very excited to see an increase in our curriculum for medic nationally in the US. Particularly in CA. Perhaps having an educational course instead of a "training" program will help move this career away from being recognized as simply a stepping stone to OTHER healthcare professions.
 
If you are asking specifically about California yes, there are alot of changes coming down the pipe. EMT and AEMT are being expanded to national model, however each county still has the ability to limit this. CA will be activly licensing new AEMTs as their trial study in nor-cal showed a benefit to allowing AEMT (emt-II). they are looking into allowing CC-P however that is not out for public comment yet.

heres the link
 
Last edited by a moderator:
socalmedic said:
If you are asking specifically about California yes, there are alot of changes coming down the pipe. EMT and AEMT are being expanded to national model, however each county still has the ability to limit this. CA will be activly licensing new AEMTs as their trial study in nor-cal showed a benefit to allowing AEMT (emt-II). they are looking into allowing CC-P however that is not out for public comment yet.

heres the link
Click to expand...

In addition to CC-P, they're also looking at an advanced practice paramedic.
 
I dont think the Board of Nursing will ever let that pass which is why I didnt even bring it up. how about we focus all this expense and effort to change the statutes and get rid of MICNs and mandatory call-ins on ALS calls. how about we set up a set of statewide protocols and get rid of the county based systems that we have now. just imagine how much money our near bankrupt state would save if we had 52 less medical directors and their staff to pay... I am just saying, how about we look at what the 49 other states are doing, and do that before we go and try to band-aid together an AEMT program that isn't needed... sorry, i had to vent. and no i dont have any evidence to post, so dont ask.
 
Personally, I'm all for telling the BON-Bons to go pound sand, be we are talking about an AAP program that's less than 200 hours on top of a 1090 hour paramedic program.

I'm not necessarily against a regional system. Riverside is going to have different needs than Orange County, etc. What works for San Fransisco County isn't necessarily going to work well for Imperial County. What should happen is massive consolidation. There's no real reason why LA, San Diego, and Orange Counties couldn't or shouldn't be consolidated into one region. Similarly, there would still need to be regional offices in order to handle licensure issues, unless every EMS provider needs to make a pilgrimage to Sacramento in order to get their picture taken for their initial license card.

Besides, are you trying to keep me from my future job?
 
you mean the regionalization that we already have set up through Cal-Ema operations, or Cal-ema Administration... I think either would work, as a provider that has worked urban and rural I can tell you that it could be made to work statewide, the actual medicine isnt different just the mode of delivery. what we need to do is re-assign everyone in cal-emsa and start over fresh bringing in administrators from other states to completely revamp our EMS system.

while some schools may still be 1080 hours, most are not. most have increased their hours to well over 1500. what I would like to see happen is to expand the number of 4 year universities that offer paramedicine programs. Loma Linda has one however they will allow EMTs, RN, RT to attend and it is mostly a research/BS degree. new mexico has what I feel should be the baseline for any CC-P or APP. maby this could be a thread topic of its own, however I don't think we have enough caliwackers here to have an anything good come of it.

and yes, I am trying to get rid of your future job, only because there is no reason to have 1 state medical director who does nothing in the way of medicine, 52 county medical directors who write protocols which are for the most part the same and then fight with the state medical director to add anything useful to the state matrix of approved stuff (such as zofran, which took 5 years to get added. and fentanyl which we still don't have anywhere besides berkley fire...), and close to a thousand agency medical directors, one for each service, who have to blindly follow the county medical directors and have no input on anythin besides his name and license number on the McKesson order form. Los angeles county alone has 50 agency medical directors (31 fire department ALS, 19 ALS ambulance companys)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
socalmedic said:
you mean the regionalization that we already have set up through Cal-Ema operations, or Cal-ema Administration... I think either would work, as a provider that has worked urban and rural I can tell you that it could be made to work statewide, the actual medicine isnt different just the mode of delivery. what we need to do is re-assign everyone in cal-emsa and start over fresh bringing in administrators from other states to completely revamp our EMS system.
Click to expand...

Those regions would work. The medicine isn't really different, but I can see why operational policy would be different. The best example would be how EMT-IIs were limited to areas where they would not displace paramedics. While I definitely see them as a replacement for EMTs, most areas would use them as a cheap paramedic, which shouldn't be allowed to happen in places like OC or LA.

Additionally, another problem I see with state wide is that it could very easily dumb everything down to LA or OC level, instead of raising things up to the SF or RivCo level (RivCo, at least with how the protocol/policy manual is written, looks really nice when compared to some of their neighbors).

while some schools may still be 1080 hours, most are not. most have increased their hours to well over 1500. what I would like to see happen is to expand the number of 4 year universities that offer paramedicine programs. Loma Linda has one however they will allow EMTs, RN, RT to attend and it is mostly a research/BS degree. new mexico has what I feel should be the baseline for any CC-P or APP. maby this could be a thread topic of its own, however I don't think we have enough caliwackers here to have an anything good come of it.
Click to expand...
I agree that ideally a BS should be required for paramedics, but I'd rather work towards getting them up to at least an associates. Sure, most programs aren't down at the 1080 level with minimal or no pre-reqs, but until systems begin to stratify their paramedics into different levels based on ability, all paramedics are going to get a similar scope outside of specific instances.

and yes, I am trying to get rid of your future job, only because there is no reason to have 1 state medical director who does nothing in the way of medicine, 52 county medical directors who write protocols which are for the most part the same and then fight with the state medical director to add anything useful to the state matrix of approved stuff (such as zofran, which took 5 years to get added. and fentanyl which we still don't have anywhere besides berkley fire...), and close to a thousand agency medical directors, one for each service, who have to blindly follow the county medical directors and have no input on anythin besides his name and license number on the McKesson order form. Los angeles county alone has 50 agency medical directors (31 fire department ALS, 19 ALS ambulance companys)
Click to expand...
There's good and bad. I definitely think that individual companies need to have their own medical director both to personalize protocols (Why should company A be punished because of the poor standards of company B?) and provide proper medical oversight. Why not go to a Texas model of delegated practice?
 
JPINFV said:
Those regions would work. The medicine isn't really different, but I can see why operational policy would be different. The best example would be how EMT-IIs were limited to areas where they would not displace paramedics. While I definitely see them as a replacement for EMTs, most areas would use them as a cheap paramedic, which shouldn't be allowed to happen in places like OC or LA.
Click to expand...

I feel that while AEMTs are valuable where they where tested, I want to say salano county, they should not be responding as the highest level provider. how about making AEMT a stepping stone requirement for EMT-P. right now i work in a dual medic configuration, there is no reason i cannot work with an AEMT to provide over site and guidance for when they promote (career ladder...) or they can be the first responders. I can tell you the firemedics i work with, however good they are almost never get past IV, NTG, EPI, LIDO before I get there, would our tax dollars be better spent sending them to 1/2 the schooling? this is an idea that WOULD be effected positively by the regional model, one which I had not previously thought about.

JPINFV said:
Additionally, another problem I see with state wide is that it could very easily dumb everything down to LA or OC level, instead of raising things up to the SF or RivCo level (RivCo, at least with how the protocol/policy manual is written, looks really nice when compared to some of their neighbors).
Click to expand...

I will have to look at the OC protocols again, but there may only be a few things that an OC medic does that are above AEMT...

yes this will be a problem in both the regional and state wide model. I know there are alot of bad paramedics in LA co. however with a standardized deployement system we can take the good ones (which there are alot of) and make them primary. eg as above, EMT and AEMT on the engine. AEMT/medic squad or ambulance. we have now reduced the number of paramedics by 2/3 and can focus our training and education at the 1/3 who actually want to be paramedics. I think LA is the only county that still requires two on a 911 call.

JPINFV said:
I agree that ideally a BS should be required for paramedics, but I'd rather work towards getting them up to at least an associates. Sure, most programs aren't down at the 1080 level with minimal or no pre-reqs, but until systems begin to stratify their paramedics into different levels based on ability, all paramedics are going to get a similar scope outside of specific instances.
Click to expand...

while I agree that an AA would be nice, I can tell you that a paramedic AA means nothing. I have one and am still going back to city college to get my transfer classes out of the way. all that was required for my aa-ems was HS algebra, english, art, history. there where no requirements for bio, micro-bio, pharm, patho, anatomy, physiology (which I got on my own thankyou;)). if we want to make a paramedic AA we need to standardize it to at least be equal to a BIO degree (or nursing...). how about we make a requirement for a 4 year health science/bio degree to be a CCP/APP if that ever passes and then encourage it down the line.

JPINFV said:
There's good and bad. I definitely think that individual companies need to have their own medical director both to personalize protocols (Why should company A be punished because of the poor standards of company B?) and provide proper medical oversight. Why not go to a Texas model of delegated practice?
Click to expand...

I feel that is exactly what the regional system would be working to get rid of. make all services in one region the same SOP/protocol. while a medical director is required to order supplys, provide a license to work under (kinda, not really. I work under the county medical director). right now I cannot tell you what my agency medical director does, he has no office, I have seen him once and he signed my 4 hour CE cert after the first hour and left, he did tell us to stay for 3 more hours and practice intubating though... I feel as though with the proper resources a regional office through the use of nurse educators:unsure:, PCCs, senior paramedics, ect could provide much more consistent oversight and training.


wow, jp we are having an actual conversation. I like it.
 
Ramathorn90 said:
I believe this is what this post is talking about

http://www.jems.com/article/training/ems-agenda-changes-will-affect-you
Click to expand...

negative, California is currently looking to change our state regulations. they want to bring EMT up the the current national standard, and scope of practice. they are also trying to add the AEMT level as we currently do not license intermediates in this state. they would like to add the AEMT level at its current national scope and standards. there is some opposition to this because some areas let their paramedics do barely more than an AEMT does, and this will cause them to have to increase their paramedic scope or revert to AEMT, the tax payers will not be happy that they have been getting ripped off for so long.

there is also discussion on the table about adding CC-P and APP. our new state director was formerly the director of public health and vaccinations so I think this was his little project, I don't foresee it going far but you never know. maby after this they will allow paramedics to transport intubated patients from one facility to another...
 
Wow JP, I always thought you lived in Maryland for some reason!
 
beandip4all said:
Wow JP, I always thought you lived in Maryland for some reason!
Click to expand...

Actually, I live in a police box that's bigger on the inside than it is on the outside.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top