Author |
Message |
Ruth Ginzbe #1 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
There was an item in today's ANN LANDERS column (or was it DEAR ABBY, I forget?) about a man having [what sounded like probably] a partial complex seizure in public. His girlfriend asked bystanders *NOT* to call an ambulance, said it was an epileptic seizure & that he had them about 6x/day. Ann Landers (or Dear Abby, whoever) agreed with the writer that the girlfriend was "a jackass" and asked what kind of 'friend' would "endanger" a person having a seizure by not taking him to the hospital. I believe that this (nationally published) advice is totally incorrect. If a person is having his or her **FIRST** seizure, or if he or she is having one LONG seizure that doesn't stop after several minutes, or one seizure RAPIDLY following on the heels of the last one, REPEATEDLY, then yes, I agree that an ambulance ride to the hospital is indicated. But if a person who already has been diagnosed with epilepsy has a seizure, and he or she is with an {*filter*} family member or friend who can see that his or her safety is assured until they get home, THERE REALLY IS NO REASON TO CALL AN AMBULANCE. The ambulance bill and the emergency room bill would be huge, and unnecessary. The family member and/or friend probably is much more familiar with what is normal or usual for that individual, and what is abnormal or unusual and requires attention or emergency attention. Finally, an epileptic seizure is not dangerous to the person having it, except if the seizure occurs while the person is engaged in a hazardous activity, thus disabling the person from protecting his or her own (or others') safety (skydiving, surfing, tightrope walking, flying an airplane, shooting the Falls in a bathtub, etc.). Just wanted to correct a nationaly published, but incorrect, suggestion. ------------------------
Philosophy Department;Wesleyan University;USA
|
Wed, 22 Nov 1995 01:35:46 GMT |
|
 |
#2 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
|
Fri, 19 Jun 1992 00:00:00 GMT |
|
 |
Russell Turp #3 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
-*---- In another recent column, Ann Landers attributed "many deaths" to LSD use. (In fact, you are *much* less likely to die from taking LSD than you are from drinking liquor.) Either she has stopped using a medical consultant, or the consultant is screwing up royally. Russell
|
Wed, 22 Nov 1995 01:48:45 GMT |
|
 |
#4 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
|
Fri, 19 Jun 1992 00:00:00 GMT |
|
 |
Gordon Ban #5 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
Quote:
>There was an item in today's ANN LANDERS column (or was it DEAR ABBY, I >forget?) about a man having [what sounded like probably] a partial complex >seizure in public. His girlfriend asked bystanders *NOT* to call an ambulance, >said it was an epileptic seizure & that he had them about 6x/day. Ann Landers >(or Dear Abby, whoever) agreed with the writer that the girlfriend was "a >jackass" and asked what kind of 'friend' would "endanger" a person having a >seizure by not taking him to the hospital. >I believe that this (nationally published) advice is totally incorrect. If a >person is having his or her **FIRST** seizure, or if he or she is having one >LONG seizure that doesn't stop after several minutes, or one seizure RAPIDLY >following on the heels of the last one, REPEATEDLY, then yes, I agree that an >ambulance ride to the hospital is indicated. But if a person who already has >been diagnosed with epilepsy has a seizure, and he or she is with an {*filter*} >family member or friend who can see that his or her safety is assured until >they get home, THERE REALLY IS NO REASON TO CALL AN AMBULANCE.
Yes, I tell this to my seizure patient families also. Ambulances and ERs are very dangerous places for seizure patients. I'm convinced that more patients are killed by IV Valium that by seizures in this country. Certainly there is a lot of morbidity. Many physicians and EMT don't realize that Valium is not indicated in a seizure, only in prolonged status epilepticus, and in the boonies, getting IV Valium for a simple seizure is almost the rule, rather than the exception. The EMT system saves people with trauma and cardiac arrest, but only occassionaly do they do any good for epileptics, in my experience (I'm sure that is going to get me some irate letters). When I've witnessed a seizure in public, I've also told people not to call the paramedics if they haven't already done so and the patient is a known epileptic. I've also done so in the case of a diabetic who had a hypoglycemic seizure and looked OK after getting some OJ and a woman who fainted in a {*filter*}tore while between {*filter*} drawings of a GTT for hypoglycemia at her Drs. office upstairs. In the latter case, they had already called the ambulance, and I spirited her up to her Dr's office so she could avoid having to argue about going to the hospital (in that locale, paramedics weren't allowed to use their judgement about that and were told to transport everyone, a stupid idea, I think). The other thing that needs to be corrected is the idea that some people have that you should put something in the mouth of the person having a seizure. Never, never, do that. The patient could aspirate or injure themselves on the object. Just move them on their side (so they don't aspirate their secretions) to the floor away from sharp objects and don't restrain them. Wait for the seizure to end. It's hard for those not familiar with epilepsy to keep cool since it looks so scary. This is why often the action oriented housestaff will push Valium on such patients. The applicable "pearl" is "first, take your own pulse". (Sorry, Ruth, couldn't let you go without a pearl.) -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Banks N3JXP | "To the intelligent, life is infinitely mysterious.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Fri, 24 Nov 1995 23:37:45 GMT |
|
 |
Stephen Montgomery-Smi #6 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
If I have some medical problem (e.g. epileptic fit) that causes someone to call an ambulance on my behalf, and then after I recover in the hospital I explain that I never wanted the ambulance called, by what legal authority is the hospital allowed to bill me for picking me up? Stephen
|
Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:48:02 GMT |
|
 |
Robert Skl #7 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
Quote:
>>I believe that this (nationally published) advice is totally incorrect. If a >>person is having his or her **FIRST** seizure, or if he or she is having one >>LONG seizure that doesn't stop after several minutes, or one seizure RAPIDLY >>following on the heels of the last one, REPEATEDLY, then yes, I agree that an >>ambulance ride to the hospital is indicated. But if a person who already has
CORRECT! Quote: >>been diagnosed with epilepsy has a seizure, and he or she is with an {*filter*} >>family member or friend who can see that his or her safety is assured until >>they get home, THERE REALLY IS NO REASON TO CALL AN AMBULANCE.
WRONG! Since people who are already diagnosed with a seizre disorder are generally medicated to prevent seizures, if would be very prudent for a person to have another evaluation for the repeated seizure. People often need to have there theraputic meds changed as time passes. Also, most seizures in seizure disorderpatients are a direct result of non-compliance with medications. Since itis unlikely that the "friend" nor the patient will watn to seek medical care on their own, ambulance tranport would be indicated. Quote: >Yes, I tell this to my seizure patient families also. Ambulances and ERs >are very dangerous places for seizure patients. I'm convinced that >more patients are killed by IV Valium that by seizures in this country.
True, IV Valium is not indicaed for a Sz unless it is status seizures. As a result, most agencies, including ours are also supplied with Phenobarbitol. Quote: >Certainly there is a lot of morbidity. Many physicians and EMT don't realize >that Valium is not indicated in a seizure, only in prolonged status >epilepticus, and in the boonies, getting IV Valium for a simple seizure >is almost the rule, rather than the exception. The EMT system saves people >with trauma and cardiac arrest, but only occassionaly do they do any >good for epileptics, in my experience (I'm sure that is going to get >me some irate letters).
One ofthe most important treatments for a patient having a seizure is to protect the patient from being injured. Sincethere are other problems which may develop, wither directly or indirectly, as a result of the seizure, paramedics should evaluate seizure patients. If they are OK and don't require transport, they need not transport. A patient has the right to refuse transport and can sign AMA. Quote: >When I've witnessed a seizure in public, I've also told people not to >call the paramedics if they haven't already done so and the patient >is a known epileptic. I've also done so in the case of a diabetic >who had a hypoglycemic seizure and looked OK after getting some OJ >and a woman who fainted in a {*filter*}tore while between {*filter*} drawings >of a GTT for hypoglycemia at her Drs. office upstairs. In the latter >case, they had already called the ambulance, and I spirited her up >to her Dr's office so she could avoid having to argue about going >to the hospital (in that locale, paramedics weren't allowed to >use their judgement about that and were told to transport everyone, >a stupid idea, I think).
I think by taking this negative attitude, you are placing the patient in grave danger. What if the patient has a syncope as a result of a slow heart rate, block or other cardiac problem which expereinced and trainned emergency medical personnel are able to check. What if her syncope was as a result of hypotension second to the diuretic she has recently been perscibed. What if she has a heart attack, faints and all you do is give her some OJ. What are you going to say if she dies? The point is, there are a number of other things which can be going on in a patient and we, as paramedics, are trained to take them all into account totreat patients in the best possible fashion. Quote: >The other thing that needs to be corrected is the idea that >some people have that you should put something in the mouth >of the person having a seizure. Never, never, do that.
This is TRUE, Never place anything in the patients mouth. Do hole the patients head to prevent further injury, but do not try to hold the persons arms, legs down. Quote: >The patient could aspirate or injure themselves on the object. >Just move them on their side (so they don't aspirate their secretions) >to the floor away from sharp objects and don't >restrain them. Wait for the seizure to end. It's hard for those >not familiar with epilepsy to keep cool since it looks so scary. >This is why often the action oriented housestaff will push Valium >on such patients. The applicable "pearl" is "first, take your >own pulse". (Sorry, Ruth, couldn't let you go without a pearl.)
-Robert --
"Why is it a penny for your thoughts, but you always have to put in your 2 cents worth? "
|
Sat, 25 Nov 1995 15:01:22 GMT |
|
 |
Ruth Ginzbe #8 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
Quote:
> >>been diagnosed with epilepsy has a seizure, and he or she is with an {*filter*} > >>family member or friend who can see that his or her safety is assured until > >>they get home, THERE REALLY IS NO REASON TO CALL AN AMBULANCE. > WRONG! Since people who are already diagnosed with a seizre disorder > are generally medicated to prevent seizures, if would be very prudent > for a person to have another evaluation for the repeated seizure. People > often need to have there theraputic meds changed as time passes.
CORRECT. So such persons can phone their neurologist's office to schedule an appointment when they get home. Quote: > most seizures in seizure disorderpatients are a direct result of > non-compliance with medications. Since itis unlikely that the "friend" > nor the patient will watn to seek medical care on their own, ambulance > tranport would be indicated.
INCORRECT. At least in the USA, if a person does not want to seek medical care on his or her own, he or she must be judged incompetent in a court of law before he or she can be compelled to submit to medical care that he or she does not want. Neither bystanders nor EMTs nor police nor ambulance personnel nor ER physicians are given the power to coerce undesired medical treatment for competent {*filter*}s. Only a judge may do that, after a proper legal proceeding. ------------------------
Philosophy Department;Wesleyan University;USA
|
Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:30:21 GMT |
|
 |
Kevin Dunn, bldg #9 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
Quote: >If I have some medical problem (e.g. epileptic fit) that causes someone >to call an ambulance on my behalf, and then after I recover in the >hospital I explain that I never wanted the ambulance called, by what >legal authority is the hospital allowed to bill me for picking me up? >Stephen
(In PA, at least) If a person is unable to make a rational, legal decision (ie if a person is - a legal minor - mentally handicapped - unresponsive/unconscious - {*filter*} or drug impaired - mentally ill/unstable NOTE: A _REASONABLE_ attempt must be made to find the person's guardian, if appropriate.. ) EMS personel, at least, assume that the person would want "appropriate care" if he or she was able to give consent. (Implied Consent) I'm sure this has been tested many times, but I have used it myself on many ocasions without a problem. People have been upset about an ambulance bill, etc, but all have paid.. I'm sure someone out there will contradict me, so take this for what it is worth.,,, -kevin
|
Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:49:34 GMT |
|
 |
Gordon Ban #10 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
Quote:
>If I have some medical problem (e.g. epileptic fit) that causes someone >to call an ambulance on my behalf, and then after I recover in the >hospital I explain that I never wanted the ambulance called, by what >legal authority is the hospital allowed to bill me for picking me up?
Most states have laws that allow ambulance companies (usually municipalities now) to bill you for such services if they were provided, under the theory that it is not safe to make them determine whether you wanted it or not. Similar laws prevent the good Samaritan who called them from being liable. The hospital neither pays the ambulance nor bills you for it. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Banks N3JXP | "To the intelligent, life is infinitely mysterious.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:14:39 GMT |
|
 |
David Ri #11 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
Quote: >INCORRECT. At least in the USA, if a person does not want to seek medical >care on his or her own, he or she must be judged incompetent in a court of law >before he or she can be compelled to submit to medical care that he or she >does not want.
I don't think this is correct in most states -- if it were, a person obviously incompetent to refuse treatment, such as a diabetic having an insulin reaction and acting combative -- could not be treated if he or she refused treatment (for instance by screaming "leave me alone"). I believe that people who are obviously incompetent can be treated for imminently lifethreatening problems without a judge's order under the doctrine of implied consent just as they could be treated if they were comatose and unable to consent. -- David Rind
|
Sat, 25 Nov 1995 23:23:53 GMT |
|
 |
J. D. McDona #12 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
Quote:
>>If I have some medical problem (e.g. epileptic fit) that causes someone >>to call an ambulance on my behalf, and then after I recover in the >>hospital I explain that I never wanted the ambulance called, by what >>legal authority is the hospital allowed to bill me for picking me up? >Most states have laws that allow ambulance companies (usually >municipalities now) to bill you for such services if they were >provided, under the theory that it is not safe to make them >determine whether you wanted it or not. Similar laws prevent >the good Samaritan who called them from being liable. The >hospital neither pays the ambulance nor bills you for it.
But what if the so-called patient when waking up, let us say, says "I refuse all care and refuse to pay". They absolutely, enequivocally, without any doubt, should not pay a penny. What if the patient has some sort of document on him that says "In case of seizure, do NOT call medical aid. It will NOT be paid for."? How could such a bill ever hold up in court? People have a constitutional right not to pay for goods and services they did not request. Doug McDonald
|
Sun, 26 Nov 1995 01:05:02 GMT |
|
 |
Gordon Ban #13 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
Quote:
>>>been diagnosed with epilepsy has a seizure, and he or she is with an {*filter*} >>>family member or friend who can see that his or her safety is assured until >>>they get home, THERE REALLY IS NO REASON TO CALL AN AMBULANCE. >WRONG! Since people who are already diagnosed with a seizre disorder >are generally medicated to prevent seizures, if would be very prudent >for a person to have another evaluation for the repeated seizure. People >often need to have there theraputic meds changed as time passes. Also, >most seizures in seizure disorderpatients are a direct result of >non-compliance with medications. Since itis unlikely that the "friend" >nor the patient will watn to seek medical care on their own, ambulance >tranport would be indicated.
Sorry, but I disagree. If they are non-compliant, and didn't want the medical care, taking them to an ER in an ambulance will not likely improve their compliance, but will run up a goodly bill. Medication adjustments should be handled by the patient's physician, not by someone in an ER who will never see the patient again. A phone call to the patient's physician will accomplish more with less expense and risk than a ride in an ambulance at high speed with siren and flashing lights. Quote: >>When I've witnessed a seizure in public, I've also told people not to >>call the paramedics if they haven't already done so and the patient >>is a known epileptic. I've also done so in the case of a diabetic >>who had a hypoglycemic seizure and looked OK after getting some OJ >>and a woman who fainted in a {*filter*}tore while between {*filter*} drawings >>of a GTT for hypoglycemia at her Drs. office upstairs. In the latter >>case, they had already called the ambulance, and I spirited her up >>to her Dr's office so she could avoid having to argue about going >>to the hospital (in that locale, paramedics weren't allowed to >>use their judgement about that and were told to transport everyone, >>a stupid idea, I think). >I think by taking this negative attitude, you are placing the patient >in grave danger. What if the patient has a syncope as a result of >a slow heart rate, block or other cardiac problem which expereinced >and trainned emergency medical personnel are able to check. What if her >syncope was as a result of hypotension second to the diuretic she has >recently been perscibed. What if she has a heart attack, faints and >all you do is give her some OJ. What are you going to say if she dies?
These are all questions of medical judgement. It is not appropriate to always assume some rare and dangerous cause when the common and obvious one is by far more likely. Once the patient is up in her doctor's office, he can run cardiograms or even call an ambulance if he wants to. The most valuable thing a doctor can learn is how to recognize when someone is really sick or not. Occassionally you will be wrong. But probably not as often as someone is injured by overtreating. Quote: >The point is, there are a number of other things which can be going on >in a patient and we, as paramedics, are trained to take them all into >account totreat patients in the best possible fashion.
In my judgement, no paramedic I've met is better trained to handle epilepsy than I am. They may have the necessary equipment when I don't, and in the exceedlingly rare cases where intubation is required may be able to do that better, but that's about it. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Gordon Banks N3JXP | "To the intelligent, life is infinitely mysterious.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Sun, 26 Nov 1995 01:11:23 GMT |
|
 |
Gordon Ban #14 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
Quote:
>INCORRECT. At least in the USA, if a person does not want to seek medical care >on his or her own, he or she must be judged incompetent in a court of law >before he or she can be compelled to submit to medical care that he or she does >not want. Neither bystanders nor EMTs nor police nor ambulance personnel nor ER >physicians are given the power to coerce undesired medical treatment for >competent {*filter*}s. Only a judge may do that, after a proper legal proceeding.
Actually, if the physician deems the patient is incompetent, emergency medical care can be rendered without consent, and the patient restrained if necessary to provide it. Patients with head injuries, or who are delirious from any cause can not wait until a judge convenes a hearing before getting medical care. This would include patients who have just suffered a seizure (almost always temporarily incompetent). However, if poor compliance was the problem, it is doubtful that any forced treatment is going to do any good in the long run unless the patient can be convinced to cooperate. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Gordon Banks N3JXP | "To the intelligent, life is infinitely mysterious.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Sun, 26 Nov 1995 01:16:06 GMT |
|
 |
#15 / 95
|
 Don't Call The Ambulance
|
Fri, 19 Jun 1992 00:00:00 GMT |
|
|
|