PHTLS, Ground EMS, Air EMS, Chest Tubes

• Previous message: PHTLS, Ground EMS, Air EMS, Chest Tubes
• Next message: PHTLS, Ground EMS, Air EMS, Chest Tubes
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

I've followed this thread long enough now to feel as if I can add something.

As a trauma surgeon with extensive EMS experience, I must side with Dr. 
Mattox.

EMT's/Paramedics and Flight RNs have no business putting in chest tubes.

This is the trauma algorithm:

Step 1: Load the patient

Step 2: Transport the patient

Step 3:  Maintain the airway, give some oxygen, etc during transport.

Helicopters are fast, flying billboards for hospital systems (by and large). 
  At least one study has refuted the "Golden Hour" concept.  Many studies 
have shot down the concept that air transport "saves lives by saving time" 
(in trauma).

Don't get me wrong:  I love EMS and medics.  I think they are doing a 
terrific job under difficult circumstances, but I simply cannot support 
advanced procedures in the field.  And, it's not because I don't think 
they're capable.  It's unneccessary.  EMS was developed for the delivery of 
cardiac care.  I am convinced it has a role for this.  I'm less convinced of 
it's role in trauma.  Spine and fracture immobilization, oxygen, airway 
control, etc: YES.  Advanced Procedures: NO.

RD

• Previous message: PHTLS, Ground EMS, Air EMS, Chest Tubes
• Next message: PHTLS, Ground EMS, Air EMS, Chest Tubes
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]