Do you document the race of your patient ?

[hatelilpeepees]

I cant see that I have ever seen it lead to trouble in writing. I guess as long as you can prove that you document the race of every patient, including whites, it shouldn't be a problem. I guess, I am against it because of a call I ran. There was a 2 car MVC on the interstate, in one car there were 2 white people, basically walking wounded, in the other car there were two african americans in a vehicle that rolled over 4 times (they had a seatbelt on and had minor injuries). When the officer on scene gave radio report to medical control (the closest hospital), he gave the race of all patients. Medical control advised him to send the two african american patients to the trauma center in the hood, but they didnt say trauma center, they just said the name of the facility, and advised them they could bring the two white patients to their facility. One of the african american patients overheard this, and raised holy hell because he was sent to the hood hospital because he was black, in his opinion, although we all knew it was due to mechanism of injury. Big stink !! Since then, I have never mentioned or documented race.

[HERBIE1]

I think the notion of race in a narrative is more pertinent to police reports. Should it be documented somewhere in the report? Sure, generally in of of the demographic fields for the reasons listed- data collection. Number crunchers and policy makers need data to justify funding, programs, and initiatives. Is it needed in the narrative? No.

I honestly think it comes from law enforcement- "an unknown Hispanic male, wearing a white t shirt...", but I'm not sure how it become relevant to EMS. I do hear many people deliver telemetry reports using race or ethnicity, or see it in reports, but I honestly never do- I see no reason. Is race pertinent to our treatment? No, but as several have said, it IS pertinent when dealing with disease processes, predisposition to illnesses, possible underlying problems etc.

[Richard B the EMT]

Wouldn't make much of a difference in my Primary Area of Response, as both local hospitals, and the 2 nearest Trauma Centers, are all in "Black" neighborhoods. All 4 of these hospitals are good ones, as I see it.

I can understand that mentioning race (Human?) is good for the number crunchers and paper pushers. However, as long as all humans bleed red when cut, it doesn't affect the actual treatment and transportation. Even "Captain Spock" would be treated correctly if I had him, dispite his Vulcan green blood.

[HotelCo]

We have a bubble sheet that is filled out every call. It includes patient race.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DwayneEMTP]

So I can understand that race is important for certain disease processes, but I'm assuming that when the doctor actually assesses the pt he too would also be able to recognize the race of the pt. Or is race recognition a protected skill for paramedics only?

Paramedics rock!

I don't document it on every patient, and certainly not for the benefit of the Doc who will likely never see my PCR but for future scrutiny of my medical care/decisions. To explain why I followed a certain line of logic, or considered a certain path if that path might not have seemed logical when race/nationality were not considered. I guess I describe race when relevant the same way I would describe age or sex. Not simply to fill out my forms but to add information that I felt made them different from the 'norm' where medical decisions are/were concerned.

Other than that it's absent from my reports with the exception of demographics.

Dwayne

[hatelilpeepees]

Ok Dwayne, not trying to put you on the spot, but to help me understand, can you give me an example of when you used race in your documentation to help explain or justify your treatment plan.

[tniuqs]

I believe it should be mandatory, the justification being that many "race" related medical genetic conditions exist, how recording some ones race is somehow not PC is beyond me.

[hatelilpeepees]

I believe it should be mandatory, the justification being that many "race" related medical genetic conditions exist, how recording some ones race is somehow not PC is beyond me.

Why ? lets say a patient has sickle cell, and you treat them for thier pain appropriately, why is it necessary to document that they were black or white ? The same is true of a patient has hypoglycemia and you give some D50, why does it matter that they were white, black, asian, or hispanic ?

[Bieber]

We have a space for it in our demographic section. I think it's relevant for the reasons mentioned above: different races have different predispositions toward disease. And while it may be rare for us to see a disease that is directly related to a patient's race, the possibility is still there. I don't ever mention race in my narrative, just in the demographics.

[tniuqs]

Why ? lets say a patient has sickle cell, and you treat them for thier pain appropriately, why is it necessary to document that they were black or white ? The same is true of a patient has hypoglycemia and you give some D50, why does it matter that they were white, black, asian, or hispanic ?

Because a thorough history is important, incidents of colitis is higher in middle European's, asians react differently with opiates, blacks have different pulmonary function, first nations have a higher incidents of reaction to first generation antibiotics ... just to mention a few issues.