Where EMS and education collide

Posted on October 10, 2020 Written by

This morning, I read an article with great interest about our local EMS system using a physician assistant who’s also a paramedic to provide enhanced EMS care — both for acute patients and to divert non-acute patients from the emergency room. The truth is that such a program has a ton of merit and would probably benefit a lot of EMS systems. While the funding may not be there, I personally believe that controlling the loss of funds from unreimbursed ambulance transports might be worth the money alone.

But this article illustrates a bigger problem with EMS. Namely, that a paramedic certification leads nowhere, except maybe a paramedic to RN bridge. The truth is that we know a lot of things about emergency medicine — and if you’re a decent provider, a lot of that knowledge carries over into other aspects of medicine. But there’s no recognized mechanism to transfer that knowledge to another discipline. And even if it did transfer over, most people in EMS don’t have the pre-requisites to get into other programs. Me included as my BA was a very studied attempt in avoiding hard science courses at UT because those courses were used to weed out pre-med students.

And the funny thing is that a MD friend of mine said she never uses those courses in her work. The truth is that the health care education field requires the wrong prerequisites. They attract people who do well in science and not necessarily those with the ability to communicate or even those who want to be caregivers. We see the results regularly, especially with physicians, when we see a clinician who can describe lab values to the molecular level but can’t communicate with a patient or their family, let alone show empathy.

We need to address two things as EMS. First, we need to find ways to bring our skillset, clinical knowledge, and life experience into healthcare above and beyond the usual two options of being on the ambulance or being a “tech” in an emergency department. Second, we need to encourage those in health care academia to recognize that alternate pathways to higher education in medical care can and should be recognized. I’d much rather attract clinicians with a proven interest in medical care as well as exposure to medicine than I would people who’ve checked off the right arbitrary coursework and who’ve never seen a sick person, much less talked to one or their family.

The challenge is for us to convince everyone else that an EMS certification brings something to the table when we want to move past working on the ambulance or the emergency department.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

EMS Education — Some Easy Places To Start

Posted on July 10, 2020 Written by

Right now, EMS is being asked to step up its game and take on more of a role in healthcare.  Even before we knew about COVID-19, EMS was being asked to do more in terms of reducing repeat patients and finding alternatives to the “you call, we haul” mentality that’s been the mantra of the American EMS system.  Of course, that’s in large part due to much of EMS reimbursement being based upon Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement models, which often get adopted by private insurance as well. And since CMS pays for transport, not treatment, EMS is going to focus on taking patients to the hospital.  And in large part, the EMS education framework focuses on immediate life-threatening conditions and the treatment thereof both in the field and in the hospital emergency department.

However, we’ve reached a point where it might be valuable to reexamine our educational framework — and maybe even make a few changes that might improve our long term prospects for EMS.  Because of COVID-19, we’ve got two new challenges.  First, we’re being asked to do more in the prehospital arena.  In many locales, paramedics and some EMTs are now able to refer or transport patients to alternative destinations.  While this change was already starting to occur, COVID-19 accelerated this.  It’s now almost semi-routine for EMS providers to tell non-acute patients that a quick ride to the emergency department is no longer the solution, whether because of the load on the EMS system or emergency department saturation. In fact, the Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services (CMS) had already rolled out a pilot program for select EMS organizations to “treat and release”prior to COVID-19.  And during the current pandemic, CMS is authorizing payment for transport to alternative destinations and some “treat and release” scenarios. And second, because of the pandemic, many of the traditional EMS clinical rotations have become unavailable for EMS students.

Rather than seeing these challenges as threats, maybe it’s time for EMS educators to reevaluate how we’re educating our future EMS providers and what we’re teaching. Anecdotally, my EMS experience has been that a lot of EMS providers have occasions where they end up transporting patients to hospitals unable to provide definitive care for the patient.  Sometimes, that’s a result of protocols or local politics. However, many EMS providers often have a remarkable lack of knowledge about medical care and capabilities outside of emergency care. This leads to two pitfalls.  One, EMS providers take the wrong patients to the wrong hospitals. Two, EMS providers have little knowledge to fall back upon beside “transport to the emergency department.”

It’s time to make two simple changes to EMS education.  First, let’s add some education, even a few hours, on the rest of the healthcare system running the gamut from acute to sub-acute, from inpatient to outpatient, from primary care to specialty care.  And let’s talk about what the different healthcare professionals and medical specialties do.  Giving us a bigger picture of where and how we fit into the world of healthcare and medicine can’t harm us.  And for those that say the EMS curriculum is already full and “there’s no room to add any more,” let’s take a look at what we’re currently teaching.  I’m pretty sure we can sacrifice some dated or low frequency topics like the Kendrick Extrication Device, seated spinal immobilization, or petroleum gauze.  Next, while clinical sites are limited, let’s look at getting EMS students into alternative clinical settings.  I’ve long believed that a rotation in urgent care, especially a pediatric urgent care facility, might provide students as much, if not more, skills and observational opportunities than many current rotations — and might have a better connection to reality.  Also, I’d suggest that EMS students might benefit from time in physician’s offices, especially specialist physicians.  The opportunity to interact with physicians AND see how chronically ill patients are managed outside the hospital would give EMS providers much needed perspective. On the same note, I’d like to see EMS students given the opportunity to follow physicians on the hospital floors.  Seeing patients only in the EMS and emergency department setting doesn’t always give perspective to the continuity of patient care. And finally, seeing as how EMS often has to deal with the failures of our healthcare system, especially for elder care, EMS students need to be exposed both to skilled nursing facilities and also to hospital discharge planning.

Addressing the education if EMS while we’re currently dealing with COVID-19 and the current financial and educational climate will put EMS in a position to both improve patient care and expand the scope of EMS for the future.

 

 

Filed Under: EMS, EMS Education

A Solution to EMS Stagnation?

Posted on June 23, 2020 Written by

As I look at EMS’s stagnation in comparison to nursing, I have a thought. Nursing has made it where a Registered Nurse is the minimum level of entry to almost any acute care role — and where an associate’s degree is the minimum education level at best.

If we’re going to push the EMS degree narrative, we need to ensure that paramedics become the de facto provider of acute prehospital care. The Emergency Medical Technician should become the Certified Nurse’s Aide of prehospital medicine — in other words, not associated with acute care — except in a first responder role.  As a friend and colleague of mine noted, an EMT’s skill set makes an immediate difference in a few cases — rapid defibrillation, tourniquet application, and the use of an Epi-Pen.   Interestingly enough, those are all skills taught in the American Heart Association’s First Aid curriculum, once again providing credence to my belief that EMT education merely adds on to a general course in first aid.  While we’re at it, in my ideal world, EMT and paramedic education would be separate, albeit with a track to advance from EMT to paramedic.  You don’t have to progress from CNA to LVN to RN, although there are programs for LVNs to transition to RN.  We should do the exact same for paramedics.

Combine that with defining the role of a paramedic (which I see as rapid assessment, stabilization, and initial treatment) in statute and zealously protecting that role from intrusions by any other profession and you might actually get EMS to become more like nursing.  In my view, nursing has succeeded for three reasons.  First, nursing defines what it is.  Second, nursing makes sure that no one else intrudes on their defined role.  And finally, nursing is willing to engage in the political process to protect their role.

Let’s not do what Canada does and call every EMS provider a paramedic.  Let’s reserve the paramedic title for those who actually do what a paramedic does.  We don’t lump physician assistants and physicians together.  Let’s keep paramedic OUR title.  Of course, that also requires us, as paramedics, to educate the public and our government about what we do — which seems to be the one thing that we are still either unable or unwilling to.  See also:  the general public, other healthcare professionals, and government officials mixing the terms ambulance driver, EMT, paramedic, and first responder.

In summary, we need to define what a paramedic is, protect said role, and ask the public to demand paramedics.  As the advertising slogan goes, “Accept no substitutes.”

Filed Under: EMS, EMS 2.0

COVID 19, Free Money, and Excuses

Posted on April 20, 2020 Written by

This is a bit far afield from my usual blogging about the world of EMS, but if you think big picture above and beyond considering what clinical skills an EMT or paramedic should have, maybe this is exactly about EMS.
A couple of things about COVID-19 and business and government. As most of y’all know, I’m a practicing attorney with over 16 years of experience in government law, so I think I have some qualifications to comment.
 
1) In regards to the availability of the various loans, contracts, and grants, especially to small businesses and individuals that all levels of government are providing, it’s no surprise to me that they’re not getting where they need to be. Government moves slowly, even when it’s trying to move fast. And when it does move fast, it often fails to consider how the program will work. (See the current Paycheck Protection Program loans and how they seem to really overlook certain businesses, especially the restaurant business.) There’s an art to doing business with or getting money from the government and it usually takes a level of sophistication to navigate it. Sometimes, it’s not merit that gets the money as much as it’s the person or company that knows how to fill in the paperwork best. Early in my career in state government, the state agency that I worked for regularly contracted for advertising services for a public relations campaign. The company that regularly got the contract had hired one of our agency’s former office managers.  One of said manager’s duties prior to leaving state employment was reviewing contracts and preparing the bid and contract documents.  In other words, that company knew exactly which forms to fill out and what answers were expected on the document. And how does this relate to EMS?  Simple. Let’s think about some of the EMS grants out there.  We know that certain EMS agencies nationwide have the expertise to apply for grant funding.  These same agencies get every grant they apply for  Meanwhile, there are small EMS services struggling to keep supplies on the ambulance that have neither the time nor the savvy to navigate the grant process while at the same time, the right large systems get a WMD trailer, a HazMat truck, and a tactical medicine supply that would keep the Green Berets and SEALS stocked for the next ten years.  Or there’s a Federal grant program available only to certain types of recipients.  For example, a grant for EMS may only be available to local government entities or to fire-based departments and will completely overlook private non-profit departments.  Moral of the story?  It often takes a lawyer or at least someone savvy with the ways of government to tap into the “free government money” that the media reports on.  And just as surely as the media will report on two things after this pandemic goes away.  First, they’ll report on some entity that did or didn’t get the money and why that’s a travesty.  Next, when the pandemic stockpiles get recreated and funded, there will be a story within the next two years about “exposing government waste” and a “warehouse full of supplies that no one has ever used.”
2) Failures.  The truth is that COVID-19 is causing unprecedented failures, whether in business or healthcare. And those failures need to be documented and measured so that we don’t make the same mistakes in the next pandemic or disaster.  BUT… it’s also a convenient excuse for failure too. There are stories of deaths being attributed to COVID-19.  At least here in the Lone Star State, death certificates allow for the listing of contributing factors.  So, while COVID-19 might have killed someone, their underlying conditions may have contributed. Or maybe the underlying conditions killed the patient, but the COVID-19 contributed.  COVID-19 might be the cause of death or it might contribute.  This applies outside of medicine too. Lately, I’ve been reading about restaurants “closing due to COVID-19.”  Yes, COVID-19 was probably the final straw.  But if you had a business already in decline, maybe COVID-19 was only the contributing factor.  Or you could have self-inflicted factors caused by your own business decisions. See also the restaurant that refused to allow delivery services BEFORE the pandemic and then closed one of their locations, even for to-go orders, at the first quarantine action by local government. Business, especially the restaurant business, is a Darwinian process with low profit margins.  Relevance to EMS?  I’d also note that EMS is known for low financial margins and is heavily reliant on government funds, as is much of healthcare.  Throwing any disruption into this narrow financial margin and there’s bound to be a financial catastrophe. (See also: nursing homes) In short, it’s always easier to blame an outside event than your own failings and decisions. Case in point being a long time local restaurant deciding to close “due to COVID-19” at the same time that the owner planned to close in the next few months due to retirement and rising rents.
3) And I’ve saved the most controversial post for last.  Let’s talk about quarantines, “stay home, stay safe,” or the popular phrase “flatten the curve.” I am the absolute first to say that COVID-19 isn’t the flu.  It’s a literal pandemic.  And we know that, right now, there’s neither a cure nor a vaccine. As such, we have to take drastic actions to slow the spread of the disease, save lives, and equally importantly, save the foundations of our healthcare system. And to get people to take drastic action, we have to create a sense of urgency. As such, we’ve told people to stay home.  We’ve closed schools and offices and told people to work from home if they can.  We’ve made the decision to take a massive hit to the economy to spare lives and lessen the strain on our healthcare system.  That decision is a no-brainer.  It’s the right decision and it remains so, especially without either a cure or vaccine for this disease. But the models predicting catastrophe have changed and reduced their estimates.  Granted, some places in the United States, like the New York City corridor, have born a terrible price.  (Population density is a real curse in pandemics.) At this point, if ever, we’re unlikely to know if the decrease in deaths is due to our social distancing efforts, better treatment regimens, or a flawed modeling scheme. At some point, whether now or at a still to be determined time, we will have to reopen the country and our economy.  The cure for the pandemic may be the death of our economy.  Clearly, we’re going to have to address this — and smarter minds than my own will have to weigh in.  I am pleased that our political leadership is looking for advice from those outside of the medical field.  While the medicine is crucial in this discussion, my own experience is that the medical community, probably more than any other field I’ve been exposed to, tends to believe its knowledge of healthcare trumps all other concerns and their expertise on health requires immediate deference on all other fields. Regardless, I’ve noticed that our society has changed over the four decades that I’ve been around.  Whether its societal evolution, the 24 hour news cycle, or a climate where social media gives everyone, even the unqualified, the same ability to spread their opinion, we’ve changed. The biggest change I’ve noticed is that our modern society is afraid. We’ve grown to demand safety over all else and find any risk intolerable.  Risk must be mitigated to an infinitesimally small factor. In other words, Karen from Nextdoor has become the avatar of our society.
Sorry for the rambling and the massive diversion from the usual EMS discussions.  Or wait…. maybe this discussion of government, failures, and risk versus safety is EXACTLY what EMS needs to advance.  As I’ve harped more than once, the practice of medicine (including EMS) involves much more than scientific knowledge and clinical skills. Medicine is like engineering or architecture — it applies sciences to human problems.  As such, medicine has to factor in more than the hard sciences.
Thanks for listening.

Filed Under: Law, Politics

Early Lessons/Thoughts From COVID-19 for EMS.

Posted on April 12, 2020 Written by

Because the science is evolving on COVID-19, we know that the end lessons from this may be different.  But I’d like to throw of my early observations out early for consideration.

First and foremost, all of the EMS grants, training, and attention paid to tactical EMS, mass shootings, explosives, and weapons of mass destruction, the real test and draining of EMS has come from an unrelenting call volume brought on by a novel, pandemic respiratory virus.  None of the MOLLE gear and self-absorbed incident command classes are worth much in this.  Except for one aspect of incident command — namely logistics.

Second, we’ve once again learned that EMS has little surge capability. I’ve discussed this before. And most EMS (and fire) services that have transitioned from being rural/suburban combination organizations to small paid departments claim they can rely on mutual aid.  That’s well and good until EVERY system is facing the same demands. Then, you’re waiting for the state and federally contracted providers to deploy within the week.  Maintaining a part-time and/or volunteer program helps relieve some of the stress on the system.

Next, if there’s one key lesson to be learned from this pandemic, it’s that EMS needs better personal protective equipment (PPE) and infection control practices above and beyond parroting the buzzword “BSI.”

In that light, I’d hope that after this, every EMS system makes appropriate PPE available. And that needs to include changes of uniform. (I’ve lost count of how many EMS services think that the part time guy only needs one uniform shirt and nothing else.)

My recommendation for after this is to have an adequate supply of surgical and N95 masks on each rig along with appropriate cleaning supplies. Everyone should get at least 2 complete changes of uniform. Ideally, there should be a couple of pairs of scrubs on board the ambulance/response vehicle in the event you have to decontaminate before returning to the station.

I’d surmise that many of the logistics problems EMS faces stem from two things.  Number one, we stink at public outreach and education.  Most people don’t even think about EMS.  Second. we’re not sure if we’re healthcare or public safety.  That makes it harder for us to access those things reserved specifically for healthcare — or traditionally provided to healthcare organizations.  It took advocacy from the American Ambulance Association to make Amazon’s healthcare specific “store” open to EMS organizations. And at least anecdotally, the public health bureaucracy which administers the majority of the pandemic response often forgets about the needs of EMS. In fact, I’m not unfamiliar with disaster response from both my career in state government as well as my EMS work — and I’m still not sure what, if anything, EMS is getting from the Strategic National Stockpile.

What would I like to see happen?  I’d like to see proper preparation for the next time, because there will be one.  And I’d like to see adequate supplies of both equipment and personnel.  But being an attorney with experience in government, I’m a realist.  And considering this experience. I am cynical enough to have a good guess of what will happen. There will be a massive initial push to get all of this done. There may even be Federal grant money to make this happen. 99.9% of the Federal grant money will be awarded to departments that don’t really need the money. 99.9% of said awarded equipment will dry rot and expire in a warehouse. Some TV newscast will run a story on “a storeroom full of stuff that no one uses” and the stuff will be surplused. Then when COVID-2023 makes its debut, we’ll be right back at square one.

The other thing my cynicism has convinced me of is that the majority of the funds made available for the next pandemic will go to the various public health bureaucracies, certain hospital networks, and the politically connected fire services.  Why?  Because those are the people with the political savvy to navigate the legislative, bureaucratic, and grant processes.

Filed Under: EMS, Politics, Rants

EBM. Do you know what it really means?

Posted on April 8, 2020 Written by

Right now, in this time of COVID-19, there’s a lot of unknowns. There are known unknowns and unknown unknowns, to borrow a phrase from Donald Rumsfeld. Right now, many of those unknowns, both known and unknown, apply to the treatment and management of the disease.  Less than two weeks ago, very educated and skilled clinicians were treating COVID-19 patients like Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and intubating patients early and placing them on a ventilator — often with terrible results for the patient  as well as overwhelming the critical care system. As we have increased our understanding of the disease, we’re finding it’s less a ventilation issue and much more an oxygenation issue with a breakdown of iron in the bloodstream.  We’ve gone from intubating patients to laying patients prone with high flow oxygen — not to mention seeing better results.

And like with any emerging issue in medicine, especially when there’s a dearth of known treatments, physicians will try novel treatments, including the off-label use of medications already in use. One of those is hydroxychloroquine, sometimes administered in conjunction with azithromycin. There have been some reports of success of treating COVID-19 patients with this combination, enough so that the President has become a loud cheerleader for this combination.  Whether you adulate, like, dislike, or loathe the current President, no one can deny that he’s a master showman who understands the power of the bully pulpit that being the occupant of the Oval Office gives you.

And because the treatment is being advocated by one of America’s most polarizing politicians, there’s immediate opposition to the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin.  If you’ve been around any EMS (or even any medical) discussions on social media, especially Twitter, politics routinely injects itself into medicine. There are a lot of physicians and clinicians of all types who feel a joint obligation to both medicine and being “woke.”

Right now, the woke clinicians on social media are opposing this particular treatment regimen in the name of “evidence based medicine,” believing that the double-blind study is the only acceptable evidence of the efficacy of a treatment or medication.  (I’d note that many of these people who poke fun at religion have a similarly blind faith in “science.”)

Yes, the double-blind study is the sine qua non of scientific evidence. I’d like a double-blind study to confirm everything that I do in medicine. But that can be taken to an extreme.  See also the satirical double-blind study of parachutes.

For everyone who blindly opposes new medical interventions based on their own scientific education obtained from the Twitter Institute of Advanced Studies and sharing Neal DeGrasse Tyson memes that repeat the phrase “science,” I’d submit that you don’t know where and how the phrase “evidence based medicine”comes from.  While evidence based medicine, also known as EBM, arose in the medical field for use by clinicians, it rapidly became the watchword of the managed care industry.  In 1985, Blue Cross/Blue Shield began using EBM to evaluate new treatment regimens. In 1991, Kaiser Permanente began using EBM guidelines for treatments.  In other words, the previously science-oriented concept of EBM became a cost control mechanism by implemented by managed care.

In other words, the people pushing the EBM mantra lack the understanding of what EBM is and how it differs from the scientific method.  In science, we should absolutely be pushing for the scientific method.  In an ideal world, we’d have the time, resources, and ability to do randomized double-blind studies on everything we do in medicine.  But we don’t.  And when humans are suffering, maybe sometimes we need to consider ethics in conjunction with a blind devotion to EBM or the scientific method.

Of course, the study of ethics is rarely absolute. It’s full of nuance and variations. And as I’ve discussed before, that’s something that neither EMS nor much of social media excel at. It’s almost like those “core courses” in humanities and social sciences might be a bit more relevant than the Twitter Science Brigade believes.  Neither medicine nor science should have an agenda.  But precisely because social media and the 24 hour news cycle exist, the very term “science” has taken on a political bent.  (e.g. “Science is real.”)

On a final note, while medicine is based in science, I consider medicine an applied science, much like engineering.  Medicine isn’t a pure science.  Rather, it’s the application of science and knowledge to practical problems.  It’s time that we all remember that — and that an education involves much more than science alone.  And science is more than sharing links from Twitter. Science is but one part of a well-rounded education, something which most of the medical world seems to have forgotten.

And that devotion to absolutism in the name of EBM or science is but another symptom of the divided red versus blue world that we’re currently in. Sadly, even a disease like COVID-19 has done little more than highlight the deep divisions in our country.

Thanks for reading.  And we will get through this — just as we got through the Great Depression, World War II, and 9/11.  On that note, “Let’s roll.”

Filed Under: EMS, EMS Education, Rants

EMS Continuing “Education”

Posted on March 2, 2020 Written by

Time for me to bring up a semi-regular rant again. The Texas Bar requires 15 hours of continuing legal education a year, including 3 hours of ethics. Up to 3 hours can be self-study including 1 hour of ethics. And the Texas Bar specifically mentions participating in social media for attorneys as part of self-study.

We all know what our state and/or the National Registry require for continuing education for EMTs and paramedics. And that, at least for National Registry much of it has to be “live.”

Riddle me this, Batman. What’s more educational? Reading a #FOAM article shared by some of the EMS/emergency medicine opinion leaders on social media, discussing low titer whole blood with the actual author of many of studies- or sitting through DVDs of the American Heart Association’s resuscitation awareness schlock or listening to whatever a self-proclaimed “EMS Celebrity” has to say at an EMS conference? While there are certainly concerns about gaming the system, that’s already been a known issue with continuing education, whether it’s people signing off on attending classes they weren’t present for or exceptionally low educational value for certain presentations. (See also: certain EMS celebrities presenting on any topic, regardless of subject matter expertise.)

With the amount of hours required to maintain an EMS certification, I’d say it’s time to start allowing a few hours of FOAM and online participation into the mix.

I’ll commend you to read this article about why we should be embracing #FOAM in EMS. The EMS world needs to embrace the evolution in EMS and medical education by giving credit to those actually looking to improve and advance their professional knowledge versus just sitting through dated material because the state or National Registry says so.

As Dr. Joe Lex says,

  • If you want to know how we practiced medicine 5 years ago, read a textbook.
  • If you want to know how we practiced medicine 2 years ago, read a journal.
  • If you want to know how we practice medicine now, go to a conference.
  • If you want to know how we will practice medicine in the future, listen in the hallways and use FOAM.

In summation, EMS continuing education needs to reflect current practice and actual continuing education as opposed to rehashes of the same dated material that is neither current nor advances medicine.  Neither card courses nor the usual cabal of celebrity EMS conference speakers reflect that.  FOAM and social media often do.  Yet, which gives you actual credit for recertification?

Filed Under: EMS, EMS Education

My Love Hate Relationship With EMS Social Media

Posted on February 18, 2020 Written by

Sorry for the delay in blogging.  None of my usual pet peeves have inspired me to blog as of late.  The truth is that volunteer EMS still has the same challenges and people still put beans in their chili, so maybe I needed to find something new to write about.  And something I shared last week on social media hit me.

I have a love-hate relationship with the internet, social media, and with EMS social media in particular.  I’ve made some incredible friends all over the world, some of whom I’ve met in real life.  Others I’ve yet to meet in real life, but I feel as if I’ve known them all of my life. But there’s also parts that drive me crazy beyond belief, yet I keep coming back to them like the guilty pleasure of watching Jerry Springer or Cops – or the morbid curiosity of looking at a car wreck.  Namely, I keep coming back to the amount of wrong information and/or dogma being spread online.  I used to try to engage and educate and I’ve stepped back a lot from that.  It’s like most debates with the willfully ignorant online: debating online with a moron is like playing chess with a pigeon —  it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory.

Image result for someone is being wrong on the internet

So, as a result, I’ve largely retreated and find my pleasure in sharing the stupid privately with like minded friends.  We largely laugh and bemoan the state of EMS and medicine in that such standards are allowed to exist.

The below average person in EMS (who we regularly mock) copes by making fun of patients, engaging in patient abuse, and the like because it’s their crummy coping mechanism for the things they don’t like, understand, or control about EMS. I think a large part of that comes from seeing the same things over and over.  I get that.

For me and people like me, what bothers us seems to be people repeating dogma, those failing to take personal responsibility for their development, and the general low standards out there. I’m as guilty of this as anyone here, if not more so, but I wonder if seeing that dumb behavior has made us cynical and jaded enough that we automatically assume the worst when we see someone post something that seems dumb as opposed to assuming they have a legit question or need for help? Heck, with the benefit of a bit of hindsight, I wonder how many of my questions as a newer EMT or paramedic came across that way.

I start wondering how many legitimate questions get overlooked because of the amount of chaff (IE dogma and mindless repetition) on EMS social media.   A friend of mine asked the same question and recognized that it’s hard to separate real questions from trolling. And then he asked the most important question, “Where do we draw the line at eating our own versus getting rid of an actual problem?”

I don’t have an answer to that.  What I do know is that the “eating our own” will likely continue as long as EMS education’s entry requirements focus on whether the check bounced and whether educational programs see their obligation as producing qualified clinicians as opposed to maintaining an arbitrary retention rate mandated from on high.

As long as retention remains more important than quality, I don’t think EMS social media will see an end to the “How do I pass National Registry?  I’ve failed four times already.” questions.

The challenge for those of us who want to excel in EMS is how to mentor and guide future clinicians without being jaded.  On a positive note, if it makes you feel any better, the attorney social media groups have enough of the same issues that I regularly wonder how some graduated law school or passed the bar exam.

Filed Under: EMS, EMS Education, EMS Social Media

On Rhode Island

Posted on December 18, 2019 Written by

Point of personal privilege here. Because I’m about to rant. And seeing as this is my blog, that’s why you’re here, right?   Sorry, not sorry, that there aren’t any Baby Yoda or cat memes here.

There’s a ton of people posting memes making fun of Rhode Island EMT-Cardiacs and their supposed inability to master advanced airway management.  Most of these memes are being posted by people who like to fashion themselves the fountains of all EMS wisdom and knowledge.  Further, some of these same types believe that their fecal material is non-odorific.

I don’t blame the average Rhode Island EMT-Cardiac for this.  (FYI, for those of you unfamiliar with the certification, the scope is somewhere between Advanced EMT and Paramedic.)  They’re working in a system that they likely didn’t develop.  And at least some, including at least one friend who I’ve literally broken bread with, are competent providers.

I do blame a toxic political culture in Rhode Island where the IAFF, fire chiefs, and politicians hold more sway over the regulation and development of the state’s arguably dated EMS system than do physicians. Rhode Island has its share of EMS issues, including an outsized influence by the fire service, fire chiefs, and fire unions and nowhere near enough involvement from EMS physicians.  Rhode Island’s limited provision of ALS care (EMT-Cardiacs aren’t paramedics.  Sorry, not sorry for that truth.) and it’s relative lack of medical dispatching place Rhode Island severely behind the times in terms of prehospital medical care.

And let’s talk about those snarky edgy social media players criticizing Rhode Island EMS.  They claim to be science-based and evidence-based.  Fine.  I’ll give them that. But what they don’t get is public policy or the political process. Nor do they truly get “just culture,” which is (rightly) supposed to be all the rage in medicine these days.  Nope.  It’s much easier to make memes and make fun of the line-level EMS providers than it is to engage in even superficial analysis and note that Rhode Island’s EMS system and the politics behind it are the problem.

I’ll give Rhode Island credit for one thing.  At least someone in Rhode Island is looking at data.  Granted, the political culture up there is doing what ossified political types do — ducking and distracting, but the data is out there.  I wonder where the data is on actual clinical performance and outcomes for some of these “smarter than you” types posting memes and claiming to be “scientists.”

In summation, for all of y’all who are poking fun at individual EMS providers, I’ll leave you with some lyrics from Ice-T.  “Don’t hate the player, hate the game.”

Filed Under: EMS, EMS Politics, EMS Social Media, Rants

Rural EMS and the Rural Hospital Crisis.

Posted on November 5, 2019 Written by

One of the best pieces of advice that an attorney gave me as I entered the legal profession was that I should read the news every day.  He told me that you never know what future cases might be in the news.  Being a bit of a nerd for politics and policy, I still follow that advice.  This morning’s review of the news led me down a trail where I ended up reading an article from a liberal/progressive publication about rural hospitals in Texas closing.

The article had two accounts of patients dying because a rural hospital in northeast Texas had closed. One patient apparently had a heart attack and the other patient had a brain aneurysm. And the article quoted family members and local politicians as saying that these people wouldn’t have died if the little hospital had still been there.

If you’ve got any experience (or even baseline knowledge) of emergency medicine and EMS in particular, you’ll know that rural hospitals have limited capabilities.  In fact, both of the cases in question likely could  not have been stabilized at a local rural hospital. Both of these patients required extensive specialist interventions that would typically be found in a larger city.  In fact, taking these patients to a rural hospital without specialist capabilities would have actually delayed care.  The well-intentioned laws designed to prevent dumping of patients into an emergency department (EMTALA) would have required the initial hospital to find a specialist facility to accept this patient and then transfer care to said facility. Even in other cases, patients admitted to a hospital may require specialist care or intensive care treatment that is largely unavailable in rural hospitals.

A properly trained, staffed, and equipped EMS system would have been able to recognize that these patients required care well above and beyond local capabilities.  Properly trained and equipped paramedics would be able to provide the same resuscitation and stabilization abilities AND transport directly to the appropriate specialist facility.  As I’ve heard said more than once, there’s no magic resuscitation fairy waiting at the hospital.  Resuscitation measures are the same, whether in an inpatient setting or out of hospital.

The solution to healthcare in rural America is not to engage in a quixotic quest to reopen rural hospitals with limited capabilities and delaying access to definitive, specialist care.  The solution is to channel that funding toward expanded access to primary care, specialists making regular visits to rural communities, and establishing a robust EMS system that provides comprehensive and competent paramedic level care. With an aging population that’s poorer than average, a strong EMS system can absolutely make a difference in rural healthcare. And our EMS voices need to say such.  We are the experts on emergency care outside the hospital.  Period.

Journalists know how to write.  They rarely know medicine.  Or policy.  In this case, their advocacy may well harm patients by delaying definitive care in favor of local care.

Filed Under: EMS, EMS Politics, Politics
« Previous Page
Next Page »