If that is the case where does it say that. That is like saying that just because you called 911 you have to go to the hospital. I understand we have an obligation to treat and transport life threats but do we also not have a duty to educate our public on proper use of emergency services. Some agency's i believe have forgotten this.If a patient wants an ambulance, they get one. We cannot refuse a patient a ride to hospital unless it endangers ourselves.
she gets the ride to the hospital. we don't transport her to her doctor's office, but if it's in the hospital, than we get to play taxi. and yes, i have been the taxi for just such a ride.Scenario
You get called for a pt who is complaing of general illness. Upon arrival you find a 23 year old female. No apparent distress and states to providers both Fire and EMS that she just needs a ride to her doctors appointment. After verifying there is no medical emergency and documenting inform her that we can not transport her to her doctor's appointment. She still insists on being transported by ambulance.
Per my State's Dept of Health, we must transport the patient anywhere they want to go (and yes, when I mentioned crossing state lines, I was told anywhere they want to go). we get used as a cross town taxi all the time too.You arrive on scene of a 40 year old man. Call was for unknown medical. Pt is AOx4. Pt is homless and his only complaint is it is to hot outside and wants to be taken to a hospital that is 40 miles away bypassing several closer facilities. Scene control once again states that he called 911 and we should just get him out of the city. Pt later states prior to transport that his friend lives by requested hospital and he knew he could get a free ride and just sign out AMA, on arrival.
If that is the case where does it say that. That is like saying that just because you called 911 you have to go to the hospital. I understand we have an obligation to treat and transport life threats but do we also not have a duty to educate our public on proper use of emergency services. Some agency's i believe have forgotten this.
Per my State's Dept of Health, we must transport the patient anywhere they want to go (and yes, when I mentioned crossing state lines, I was told anywhere they want to go). we get used as a cross town taxi all the time too.
If they call for the ambulance, taken em to the hospital of their choosing, unless you have an administrative support in writing saying you can deny them transport.
In Maryland we transport to the closest appropriate facility, as per protocols. Gee, I guess I finally found one example where MD isn't so backwards (in the opinion of many other members here, not including myself) compared to other jurisdictions.
Scenario
You get called for a pt who is complaing of general illness. Upon arrival you find a 23 year old female. No apparent distress and states to providers both Fire and EMS that she just needs a ride to her doctors appointment. After verifying there is no medical emergency and documenting inform her that we can not transport her to her doctor's appointment. She still insists on being transported by ambulance.
Second scenario.
You arrive on scene of a 40 year old man. Call was for unknown medical. Pt is AOx4. Pt is homless and his only complaint is it is to hot outside and wants to be taken to a hospital that is 40 miles away bypassing several closer facilities. Scene control once again states that he called 911 and we should just get him out of the city. Pt later states prior to transport that his friend lives by requested hospital and he knew he could get a free ride and just sign out AMA, on arrival.
Errrr, so in MD your not allowed any choice in where your transported to, it's solely up to a possibly lazy burned out provider?
If 911 is called, EMS responds, patient want's to go to the hospital, why would EMS refuse?