Requiring EMT Training

[MrJones]

DesertEMT66 made an interesting point in the Instilling Confidence thread:

...We get around 20 students each semester who take the class who don't want to be EMTs or do anything in the medical field at all....

I can think of at least 2 career fields - fire fighting and athletic training - that include the requirement to qualify as an EMT, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that there are others. The question is, if we want our profession to grow as an actual, you know, profession, should we allow other career fields to force their students into the EMT pipeline?

Consider, for example the firefighter hopeful who comes to class with an attitude of "I'm only doing this because I have to in order to be a firefighter on XXX department. I'm going to do the minimum necessary because I'm really not interested, and on ride time I'll likely spend more time on my FaceBook than I will on learning the job of an EMT." The program, on the other hand, has a vested interest in seeing as many students as possible pass both the course and the state/national testing process. This results in lowered standards and "teaching the test", as well as an overall lowering of the quality of students being sent out to the field.

So what do we do? Anything? Nothing? I'm interested in your thoughts.....

 

[vcuemt]

Out of my EMT class of eight, I know of two who have yet to test. One (a high schooler) did it because she thought she might be interested and knew that riding with a rescue squad volunteer would look good on a college app, and one still hasn't tested for what I'll describe - for lack of a better word - as laziness. But when the barriers to entry are so low and the requirements, be they mental, physical, fiscal, or otherwise, are equally as low you can't blame folks for just dipping their toes in the water via an EMT class and later deciding they either don't like the temperature or have experienced enough to satisfy their personal requirements.

Not sure if I took that metaphor a little too far but you get my drift.

 

[Akulahawk]

DesertEMT66 made an interesting point in the Instilling Confidence thread:



I can think of at least 2 career fields - fire fighting and athletic training - that include the requirement to qualify as an EMT, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that there are others. The question is, if we want our profession to grow as an actual, you know, profession, should we allow other career fields to force their students into the EMT pipeline?

Consider, for example the firefighter hopeful who comes to class with an attitude of "I'm only doing this because I have to in order to be a firefighter on XXX department. I'm going to do the minimum necessary because I'm really not interested, and on ride time I'll likely spend more time on my FaceBook than I will on learning the job of an EMT." The program, on the other hand, has a vested interest in seeing as many students as possible pass both the course and the state/national testing process. This results in lowered standards and "teaching the test", as well as an overall lowering of the quality of students being sent out to the field.

So what do we do? Anything? Nothing? I'm interested in your thoughts.....

I looked at the NATA's requirements for athletic training and they didn't require EMT training as part of the initial education to become an athletic trainer. An individual program may require that instead of First Aid/CPR, but I still haven't seen any requirement by the NATA for such certification. Towards the end of my sports med program, I took an EMT course and easily snoozed through it and actually had to learn NOT to do certain assessment skills because they were way too advanced. I think the only new skills I learned were oxygen administration and use of oral airways. IMHO, it really wouldn't be that much of a stretch to add in a few more hours of instruction to a "standard" athletic training education program and add an ambulance internship and allow athletic trainers to challenge the NRP exam and become Paramedics or to have their certification be considered equivalent to NRP.

 

[MrJones]

I looked at the NATA's requirements for athletic training and they didn't require EMT training as part of the initial education to become an athletic trainer. An individual program may require that instead of First Aid/CPR, but I still haven't seen any requirement by the NATA for such certification....

My bad. Because my university and others are now requiring EMT as part of the degree program for athletic trainers I assumed (yeah, I know) that it was a universal requirement. Regardless, my point stands.

 

[Akulahawk]

My bad. Because my university and others are now requiring EMT as part of the degree program for athletic trainers I assumed (yeah, I know) that it was a universal requirement. Regardless, my point stands.

It's not a bad idea for athletic trainers to be "dual certified" as an EMT. What concerns me is what happens if an athlete is injured and a single person provides or directs care at both the EMT and athletic trainer levels... their report will end up documenting care provided that's well above the typical EMT scope. If the EMS system there doesn't understand what athletic trainers are trained to do, that could cause problems for the trainer/EMT.

 

[Rin]

On the one hand, much of the EMT course is basically an advanced first aid course (if you're off duty/not toting a whacker-bag). In that respect, the more people walking around that can recognize the signs of a heart attack, stroke, or diabetic emergency, and know what to do about it, the better.

On the other hand, I think there's a push coming for schools to make /meaningful/ employment data available. It will hurt programs then that have low NREMT pass rates (hard to pass if you don't take the test!) and low numbers of students that ever seek employment in the field.