Killing Your Patients

sir.shocksalot said:
As much as I agree that time is hardly a factor in most disease processes that we encounter, I don't think the public would stand for 20 to 30 minute response times.
Click to expand...

They seem to tolerate twice, if not 3 times the wait time for an ER visit. It's our own fault that we built this system around response times and advertised it as such. I would venture out to say at least 80% of our responses don't benefit from a code-3 response.

Only in EMS will you get seen RIGHT NOW regardless of your complaint.
 
SeanEddy said:
They seem to tolerate twice, if not 3 times the wait time for an ER visit. It's our own fault that we built this system around response times and advertised it as such. I would venture out to say at least 80% of our responses don't benefit from a code-3 response.

Only in EMS will you get seen RIGHT NOW regardless of your complaint.
Click to expand...

how many of you guy's walk to the rescue/ambulance, or run to the restroom real quick before getting in the rescue?

Do you ever run on scene?

L&S don't save a lot of time in most cases, and in the times when they do save any amount of time, we are maneuvering around still traffic extremely slowly, with the air horns blazing.

I think there is some sort of study/article floating around claiming that the majority of EMS patients are better off being transported in their POV.
 
MrBrown said:
frusemide for CHF
Click to expand...
point of information: isn't furosemide/Lasix a standard treatment for CHF?

Lifeguards For Life said:
how many of you guy's walk to the rescue/ambulance, or run to the restroom real quick before getting in the rescue?
Click to expand...
Sad/scary part is, I know of systems that will talk a stable and ambulatory patient to the ambulance, and then transport lights and sirens to the hospital, where the person is put into a wheelchair and left in triage.

and the even scarier part is, the justification for doing this is that there are job pending, and they are too busy to transport non-emergency for non-life threats.
 
DrParasite said:
point of information: isn't furosemide/Lasix a standard treatment for CHF?
Click to expand...

I will assume on Browns behalf that he means acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema as opposed to the long term medical management of congestive heart failure.
 
Administering .3-.5mg 1:1000 epi IVP for suspected anaphylaxis, even though patient has no respiratory component, just hives.
 
rhan101277 said:
Administering .3-.5mg 1:1000 epi IVP for suspected anaphylaxis, even though patient has no respiratory component, just hives.
Click to expand...

That's not really a good-faith mistake. That's a result of a poor assessment.
 
Lifeguards For Life said:
I think there is some sort of study/article floating around claiming that the majority of EMS patients are better off being transported in their POV.
Click to expand...

Yea it's called 95% of the calls I run not even needing an ambulance, much less a code-3 response. It's pretty ridiculous.
 
DrParasite said:
point of information: isn't furosemide/Lasix a standard treatment for CHF?.
Click to expand...

In somee places Im sure it is, not here.

Volume depletion.

At times it can be difficult to differentiate pneumonia, exacerbation COPD and CHF
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rhan101277 said:
Administering .3-.5mg 1:1000 epi IVP for suspected anaphylaxis, even though patient has no respiratory component, just hives.
Click to expand...

Um yeah, that dose of such concentrated adrenaline is likely to have a bit of an effect all right :D

... and yes, that's like super assessment fail, but not as bad as those Los Angeles City Fire Paramedics who gave frusemide to a lady with leg pain because it had to be CHF .... (yes, thats in the literature somewhere, Brown has read it)
 
Wasting time and trying to be the hero onscene during a trauma call, in lieu of extremely rapid transport.
 
Death_By_Sexy said:
Wasting time and trying to be the hero onscene during a trauma call, in lieu of extremely rapid transport.
Click to expand...

Please elaborate because this is a potential super-mega-hella-king sized-value meal-US EMS fail right here.
 
MrBrown said:
Please elaborate because this is a potential super-mega-hella-king sized-value meal-US EMS fail right here.
Click to expand...

What's interesting is that I heard Russian EMS providers (physicians and physician assistants mostly) often criticizing US EMS precisely for "load and go" approach for life-threatening conditions, including major trauma. They basically say "paramedics over there are trying to transport unstable patients rather than stabilize them on scene, so their patients end up dying en route or shortly after arrival".
 
Know when to boogie and where to.

Until ambulances have operating rooms, labs, and diagnostics beyond basically EKG, stethoscope, BP cuff and a couple others (yes, I simplify, but not too much), there are cases where if you get bogged down trying to resuscitate when the trouble is out of your league, your delay will make demise more likely. Like, any STAT belly, obstetric emergencies, intracranial bleeds, dissecting aortas...the list goes on and on.

On a simpler note, how about strapping on the oxygen mask then something occludes the line or the oxygen runs out and you fail to notice? "Non-rebreather" gains a whole new depth of meaning there.
 
Foxbat said:
What's interesting is that I heard Russian EMS providers (physicians and physician assistants mostly) often criticizing US EMS precisely for "load and go" approach for life-threatening conditions, including major trauma. They basically say "paramedics over there are trying to transport unstable patients rather than stabilize them on scene, so their patients end up dying en route or shortly after arrival".
Click to expand...
You are comparing apples to pears....

a physicians and a physician assistant can do more than a paramedic. can a paramedic insert a chest tube? can a physician?

the load and go approach is used because in the majority of multi system traumas, the patient needs a trauma center, for both the assessment tools and the trauma surgeons to fix the problems.

there is only so much you can do in the ambulance. a hospital ER has more staff, more interventions, and more diagnostic tools than a paramedic does in the back an ambulance.

truly sick people need an ER (and all the support that comes with it), not a paramedic. the latter can only do so much in a short amount of time, the former is better suited to both treat and long term manage the patient
 
Brown wonders how much of "load and go" is underassessment and overtriage.
 
DrParasite said:
You are comparing apples to pears....

a physicians and a physician assistant can do more than a paramedic. can a paramedic insert a chest tube? can a physician?

the load and go approach is used because in the majority of multi system traumas, the patient needs a trauma center, for both the assessment tools and the trauma surgeons to fix the problems.

there is only so much you can do in the ambulance. a hospital ER has more staff, more interventions, and more diagnostic tools than a paramedic does in the back an ambulance.

truly sick people need an ER (and all the support that comes with it), not a paramedic. the latter can only do so much in a short amount of time, the former is better suited to both treat and long term manage the patient
Click to expand...
While a Physician and a PA will undoubtedly have more education than a Paramedic will... Trauma victims need a surgeon, an OR and enough hands to make sure that everything is ready to support the patient. Last time I checked, an ambulance makes for a poor OR and generally lack enough trained hands to do the job well (let alone have sufficient supplies of, well, everything because you'd have to be ready for any surgical need...)

Truly sick people do need an ER. Why? All the support/resources available. An ambulance doesn't (yet) have the ability to do portable X-ray and doesn't have a CT scanner. While there is bedside lab equipment out and about in the world, a much better lab capability is available to the ER. There are Pharmacy services available there too. An ambulance can stock only so much.

"Stay and play" vs "load and go" is a very old argument that does need to be rehashed every so often to make sure that those patients that should be stabilized on scene, are while the patients that need transport urgently should get it... regardless of who is staffing the ambulance.

Delete the Paramedic vs MD/PA stuff and a good argument was made by DrParasite about the limitations of ambulances.
 
Smash said:
I will assume on Browns behalf that he means acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema as opposed to the long term medical management of congestive heart failure.
Click to expand...

I am confused. I have seen lasix/frusemide used to treat cardiogenic APO and as a prescribed diuretic in CCF/CHF patients.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top