Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
Emerg Med Serv ; 32(11): 53-60, 2003 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-14658213

RESUMO

By using the EMS "tools" discussed here, your exposure to mismanagement of patients who refuse treatment/transport can be greatly mitigated, but probably not completely eliminated. Remember, an EMS provider may be the last medical professional to see a patient alive before he refused transportation. It is suggested that EMS providers research their own local and state laws concerning patient refusal, as these laws vary from state to state. At a bare minimum, your refusal policy must address the high-risk refusals that trigger medical oversight, some method for determining patient competence, and a documentation policy with post-review that supports a well-constructed account of the refusal. As for the chest pain patient discussed earlier. If this patient can be determined "competent" regardless of his cardiac stability and etiology, he can refuse treatment and transportation. The EMS provider's protocols should address the use of MMSE and OLMC consultation. The OLMC consult should involve a conversation with both the patient and his wife, who would add credibility to her husband's competence and could possibly be used as a source of support for EMS. If determined competent, the risks of refusing treatment and transportation would be discussed on the radio, including the patient's possible death. The patient would be advised of the benefits of transportation, including the proposed EMS care and ensuing treatment at the hospital. If not convinced, the patient could sign an informed refusal, witnessed by his wife or another third party. The patient and his wife would be advised to call 9-1-1 if the chest pain returns.


Assuntos
Serviços Médicos de Emergência/normas , Competência Mental/legislação & jurisprudência , Recusa do Paciente ao Tratamento/legislação & jurisprudência , Protocolos Clínicos , Documentação , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/legislação & jurisprudência , Florida , Humanos , Competência Mental/classificação , Relações Profissional-Paciente , Testes Psicológicos , Gestão de Riscos , Transporte de Pacientes/legislação & jurisprudência , Transporte de Pacientes/normas , Estados Unidos
3.
Emerg Med Serv ; 31(8): 69-70, 73-5, 2002 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12224238

RESUMO

Pinellas County EMS' Medical Communications Officers provide a wide variety of services to patients, field clinicians, managers and their medical director. The concurrent data collection processes used in the MCO program for performance measurement of resuscitation efforts, intubations, submersion incidents and aeromedical transports for trauma cases have been very effective in the integration of data from multiple computer databases and telephone follow-ups with field crews and receiving emergency department staffs. This has facilitated significant improvements in the performance of these and many other aspects of our EMS system.


Assuntos
Pessoal Administrativo , Sistemas de Gerenciamento de Base de Dados , Sistemas de Comunicação entre Serviços de Emergência/organização & administração , Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde , Integração de Sistemas , Computadores , Coleta de Dados , Documentação , Florida , Humanos , Sistemas Computadorizados de Registros Médicos , Papel Profissional
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA