List Archives

Sun Nov 5 13:14:27 GMT 2006

you said-
"Problem being that he's now upright and relatively coherent..."
well, the problem was that if he did crash, there was little I could do, 
since the only medical equipment I had was disposeable gloves (I don't 
usually carry an Ambu bag when I go out on friday nights...) . Morever, the 
ambulance could drive to the hospital faster.

I was immediately concered that he might have an epidural hemaetoma, and so 
should any EMT-B be.

>From: Krin135 at aol.com
>Reply-To: "Trauma &amp; Critical Care mailing list" 
><trauma-list at trauma.org>
>To: trauma-list at trauma.org
>Subject: Re: Consesnt vs. Responsibility; Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 16:14:15 
>EST
>
>
>In a message dated 11/4/2006 1:05:47 PM Central Standard Time,
>tangentcarrot at hotmail.com writes:
>
>The  first dillema is- should EMS personnel (EMT-B'S, in this case) insist
>with  such pateints? I tried conviencing them to "talk some sense" into 
>him,
>but  they refused,despite my description of coma and amnesia, saying they
>couldn't force him and that "he looks fine now", and left the  scene.
>
>
>Problem being that he's now upright and relatively coherent...while he is
>displaying the classic 'lucid interval' that may presage an expanding 
>epidural
>bleed, there's nothing that you can do for him right now...
>
>Once he passes out, at least here in the US and Canada, 'implied consent'
>becomes possible, and further treatment can be rendered.
>
>ck
>Charles S. Krin, DO FAAFP
>--
>trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG
>To change your settings or unsubscribe visit:
>http://www.trauma.org/traumalist.html

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

List Archives

For your convenience, find the Trauma List Archive Below

Consesnt vs. Responsibility;