JakeEMTP

It is really Mateos' residence. After being part of this board for as long as he has, I thought he might have taken that stuff down by now. Once a whacker, always a whacker.

Damn cell phones again. We had a call one night from a elderly Gentleman at a NH, c/c of unable to pee. the pt. placed this call according to dispatch. Turns out he needed his cath bag emptied. Could have been a UTI though. Just one of the things I was thinking about enroute. Always do an assessment

One of my favorite Newfie sayings. Along with, " Stays where yur at 'till I gets where yur too."

I considered it Annie. The truth is, I really don't associate the two.

I forgot. It's inappropriate. The sexual connotation just never came to mind. :oops:

Wait! They have stubbies again? I'll take them as long as they're Molson Canadian. How about sending a Timmys Maple donut also.

Ooh!. I almost forgot. I get to have to Thanksgiving days. Happy Thanksgiving you hosers!

I really can't offer a constructive ideas since I haven't been involved in a PUM system and do not work where SSM is taking place. I do however, have a few thoughts on this, right or wrong. The current rate for a ambulance call of $998.00 + $14.00 seems excessive. That is almost double what we charge (maybe we're missing the boat here. However, if medicare only pays 50%,wtf?, are they aggressively billing for the remaining outstanding balance?) Couldn't the Three Rivers Ambulance Authority run this system without AMR or the FD? Maybe by having a subscription charge to residents, then billing medicare for the rest? Again, I haven't any idea, this is all new to me. I mean, EMS doesn't have to make a profit if run by local Government. Heck, breaking even would be nice. The fire service isn't profitable either, yet taxpayers pour millions and millions of dollars into it. I think SSM would suck. I haven't had to do it but it just doesn't seem palatable to me. Why don't they stage the Big Red Truck if they can look into the crystal ball and determine where the most 10-50's occur? I will watch the remainder of the thread with interest. I really have nothing of value to add.

That was cheeky indeed. Stayed tuned for the well thought out retort to the posters query. :roll:

I think I'll add that website to my favourites. You know, for when I need a good chuckle.

Touche!

I haven't the foggiest ERDoc. Whoever it is, they can't spell labour or specialisation.

I Totally agree with you here. No question, 2 medics are better than 1 and if I need a driver, a FF will suffice. I think we are in agreement here. I also agree with this statement. That's not what I was saying. All ambulances should be dual medic is.

P3, Regardless if the BLS providers have any additional 600 hrs at the Academy is irrelevant. They still don't have your education. You say that having BLS ambulances (is that an oxymoron?) relieves the ALS to respond to more serious calls. But, if BLS is dispatched originally and they deem the call ALS, or vise versa, isn't there now 2 ambulances out of 24 at the same call? Please explain how that is an efficient use of resourses.If all Boston EMS ambulances were ALS, there wouldn't be the need to send 2 units to the same call. I agree not all pt's may require ALS interventions. They do however deserve an ALS assessment.

LMAO! Thanks Ridryder! I just spewed Pepsi on my partner!

As compared to what? How good would the numbers be if the number of ambulances responding to calls was cut in half? Would the cost savings in fuel alone be enough to have medic only response? it's the same old same old. This is the way we've always done it so it must be right.

You cut me to the quick. I'm hurt.

^^^^^^ LMAO! Can anyone (or everyone) say sarcasm?

I despise the fact my partner talked on the phone while driving me and my patient to the hospital. I confronted her about it and said " You know, you're really not as important as you think you are. Whatever it is that is SO important that you feel the need to jeapordise my life and the patients, will have to wait or you'll be off the ambulance". We recently instituted a policy regarding this issue that I helped create. No cell phone use is permitted while driving the ambulance. None. Nada. If I feel the need to call a supervisor to replace you, I will. I do not and will not tolerate cell phone use while driving. We are here to work, not socialise. Perhaps it's because I grew up in a era when no one had a cell phone ( I know the under 30 crowd will find it hard to believe and I think I just heard a collective GASP!) and we seemed to function ok. Cell phone use whilst driving is a proven distraction that is easily removed. With or without the user.

That's the best Captain Kirk impersonation ever. Just take your Norvasc and watch :roll: .

Lets see, if I was offered the opportunity presented to you, I would have to consider the pros and cons. Pros - More money - Educating, the ability to pass on your knowledge - no more lifting - No more night shifts - more time at home with family Cons - I guess I would have to seriously consider it. The pros have it.

Painful to watch. One theme that kept running throughout the whole video was how gratifying it is to "save" somebody. It made "me" feel great about "myself". That is not what EMS is about. It's not about us and how it makes us feel all warm and fuzzy. It is about providing pt. care and thats all. Nice job with the first patient with asthma. :roll:

Here's one I found in my archives of "Things from Paramedic classes". http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:0ThN1...;cd=3&gl=us The formulas' get you close, but don't you want to be exact? ( I seem to recall Paramedicmike giving me the same advice. Or a reasonable facsimile thereof. Thanks Mike. 8)). Solving for "X" isn't all the difficult. As a medic who was in your shoes not that long ago, you should strive to know what you're doing. Try not to rely on quick fixes and easy formulas. Understanding the "hows and whys" you came to the appropriate drip rate, correct dosage etc. can be gratifying. It is also paramount in your progression to paramedic. Good luck with your classes. :thumbleft:

Here's some good that has come out of this tragedy. Ground crews will now have to make contact with a MD at the trauma centre before calling for a helicopter. Good news for EMS professionals, bad news for the whackers, or is it monkeys? You know, call for a helicopter because that's the way it's always been done. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/ba...0,6602002.story Personally, I see it as a step backwards for EMS in general. More "mother may I" protocols due to abuse of HEMS and a lack of understanding of what really warrants a flight.. Dr. Bledsoe makes a good point. Instead of instilling this new protocol, why not just change the criteria for helicopter transport? :?

Except sending 2 ambulances to the same location is a duplication of service. Considering the fuel cost alone would make one consider the merits of this response. As always, if all ambulances were ALS and staffed by medics, there wouldn't be any discussion about this. Anyway, there isn't (or shouldn't) be BLS and ALS, only pre-hospital medical care, which encompasses both.