Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 Good post Gene, I usually just browse the list and don't post often, but this one caught my attention. It is very sad that something bad has to happen to a high profile individual or their family member before action is taken on certain issues and concerns. Unfortunately, that's just the way it is. Truly a sad state of affairs for all concerned. I also agree on the shift rotation challenge, especially for busier services, 24 hours on the job is too much, even if you are allowed to sleep. 12 hour rotations would be better, or optimally 8 hour shifts. I feel the overall quality of patient care would improve and also crew safety along with lowered levels of burn out in the profession. The EMS field is faced with many challenges,but without challenges and adversities, there would be no room for growth and advancement. Just my .02 " All that is necessary for the triumph of evil, is that good people do nothing " ~Edmund Burke~ > Re: Shifts > > There are considerations other than economics that ought to be considered > when setting up shifts. One is the workload and level of fatigue that may > result from a given shift. > > My contention is that 24 hour shifts are very bad when there are high call > levels. When one has come to work at 0600 and it is now 0400 and one has run > 21 calls, the cardiac arrest that one responds to can't possibly get the best > care. > > There is a law in New York known as the " Libby Zion " law which was enacted as > the result of a malpractice suit involving ER Residents who had worked > exhausting shifts. This law limited the number of hours that Interns and > Residents could be required to work. There is no similar law for EMS, but > there should be. > > In high-volume systems, I think either 8 or 10 hours shifts ought to be the > maximum. After that, care has got to suffer. > > When will we (meaning the great mass of humanity) finally come to the > realization that patient-care concerns outweigh budgetary concerns? It's so > popular to sound off about budgetary concerns and limiting government and > spending less and less, until one's own life and family are at stake. Then, > suddenly no amount of money is too much to spend on EMS. There's no event > that can lead to increased budgetary support of EMS like the emergency that > happens to a politician or a member of her/his family. That's sad, isn't it? > > > Gene Gandy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.