|
|
Post by jtstallone on Feb 29, 2016 4:52:34 GMT
With local paid ambulances now staging throughout their response areas, local fire departments are starting to ask fire control not to dispatch them to certain medical calls (such as all alpha and certain bravo calls). What is everyone's opinion on this new trend? I see the positives of this as being that the ambulance can quickly be on scene to calls, therefore there is no reason for the fire department to increase the risk of responding lights and sirens when the ambulance already has the call under control. The negative would be that the ambulance personnel will not have extra personnel respond right away if needed. I guess the ambulance personnel can always ask the fire department to respond if needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart seibel on Feb 29, 2016 15:06:04 GMT
some fire dept. have chosen not to respond to priority two calls. I am inclined to agree with this. I don't feel like the fire dept. should respond. Most of the priority two calls are for general sickness. You don't need a lot of people running to the fire house risking their lives for this, when the ambulances can handle it. If when the ambulances crew gets on the scene and they need help they can always call the fire dept.
|
|
|
|
Post by kathleenedgin on Feb 29, 2016 20:40:22 GMT
From personal experience - the fire department that I used to run calls with as an EMT, would be called out for certain circumstances. These were 1,.) if there was no ambulance en route; 2.) if the ambulance was coming in from a neighboring town; 3.) if additional assistance was needed by the Ambulance; and 4.) if there was going to be a delay of any sorts to get to the call.
I understand why some departments would look to not respond to certain types of calls, especially for the volunteer departments where costs to keep operating are a factor. The downside is, that the one call the department doesn't respond to, may be the one call where they are really needed and could make a difference.
I personally feel that the department should respond to a call even if it is a priority two call. You never know how bad the situation is and maybe the interventions that we (EMTs with the fire departments) do before the arrival of the ambulance make the difference between a patient being stable and the patient crashing while on the way to the hospital.
|
|
|
|
Post by louannj59 on Mar 3, 2016 3:22:32 GMT
I feel most EMS calls require more than 2 people to take care of the scene of EMS .The safety and care of patient appears to have best outcome when there is more volunteers to assist in moving patient to the ambulance from all types of environment and assist in pre-hospital care.
|
|
|
|
Post by katecardinali on Mar 4, 2016 4:27:24 GMT
There's pros and cons to both sides, your departments funding, resources and manpower ultimately become the determining factor in whether or not to respond to Priority 2 calls. Not responding means less call volume, less liability and vise versa.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaylawalker on Mar 6, 2016 4:47:57 GMT
I think there are pros and cons of each side but in my opinion it's not worth putting the fire department on the road for priority 2 calls. Most of these calls are general illness calls that the ambulance can handle very easily on their own. My past department opted not to respond to priority 2 calls unless asked by the ambulance because they cover a college campus and some of the students would call for an ambulance because they were sick and wanted a ride to the hospital to get medication and they did not have a car to get there. The department decided those calls are not worth liability of someone getting into an accident responding to the firehouse or scene.
|
|
|
|
Post by joevfd on Mar 6, 2016 20:57:35 GMT
I don't feel the fire dept. should respond to priority 2 calls aka general illness or a nose bleed if the ambulance needs help they can have us toned out.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimdale on Mar 8, 2016 21:12:12 GMT
A lot of people have responded to this topic. Some pro some con. As an emt on the ambulance side we never know what we are rolling up to. No matter what the dispatch info. is its almost never right on the money. it may come in as a priority two call , think about it this is relayed by someone who is not even on the scene. if fire is on the scene and they designate a priority that's different. ambulance crews are made up of two people. that's why its nice to have extra help ,such as help lifting a large pt. or dragging some , lifting someone, and battling a combative pt. all whose call may have been dispatched as a priority two call. believe me its nice having fire locate the residence, we have numbers but not map locaters. every time you show up on the scene before us it is greatly appreciated. |
|
|
|
Post by durfeew on Mar 9, 2016 15:16:40 GMT
Perhaps it may be beneficial to only tone out ambulances for calls like lift assists, for often only fire is dispatched to them and the patients often have to get transported anyway, which results in a delay for the ambulance wasn't toned with fire. In these instances, if the ambulance had been toned in place of fire, this delay would be eliminated, and if more assistance is required they can ask fire control to have fire toned. For when fire is constantly toned for non emergent calls, the volunteers may become burned out leading to lighter crews on more emergent calls when they are needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by timdodge on Mar 10, 2016 0:30:28 GMT
I tried to get my fire district to approve not responding to priority two calls. They say folks in the district pay fire taxes and expect someone from the fire department to respond when they are in need of help. Needless to sat we are still responding to all ems calls.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brad Ano on Mar 10, 2016 14:26:09 GMT
My Opinion if a Fire Department has a rescue, they should be dispatched to all EMS calls.
Fire Departments are there for their community, We should never take someone’s Emergency to be a “hassle” or “un warranted risk to respond” . If a person has called 911… to them, they are in need of emergent care… the them it is an emergency. If it’s a case where the ambulance crews always get to the scene first, then simply ask that agency to cancel you if they do not need assistance. Also If it’s a volunteer agency then an individual has the option of going or not going if they don’t feel it warrants their assistance. Personally , if I called 911 and the local fire dept did not feel my problem was emergent enough to respond, I would feel disappointed.
When it comes to Fires, 10 Districts will be called in for a small oven fire, Foregoing the risk of MVC etc.... but EMS calls no one wants to respond..
As far as lift assists go, the same could be said for the other point of view, Why hold up an Ambulance that may be needed elsewhere for treatment/transport. Like someone said above.... you never know what you are actually walking into when dispatched to a call. its always nice to have backup... I feel Ambulances and Rescues should be dispatched to all EMS calls for that very reason.
Our location we have great response from all local Fire Dept. so I haven’t seen this come up, and we all work well with each other. Im thankful to have such active Fire Departments to start treatment and assist with further treatment once the ambulance arrives. Thanks!
We should not lose sight of what it is to be EMS, or in any Emergency response field.. here to help, no matter how big or small the problem may seem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt W. on Mar 10, 2016 14:42:53 GMT
I agree with Brad Ano. Most commercial ambulances run with 2 people on it. Its nice to have the fire department to respond say if you need help lifting the patient or even just getting them out of the house. So if a ambulance is the only one dispatched then they would have to intern wait for the fire department to respond therefore delaying patient care. Also i have this happen you get dispatched for a general illness call and when you walk in to greet the patient it turns out to be a full arrest. So personally I believe a fire department should respond to any medical, especially nowadays when there is a increase in medical emergencies and a decrease in fires.
|
|
|
|
Post by marknicolettajr on Mar 10, 2016 20:46:00 GMT
In my department, the only EMS calls that Fire rigs do not go on are MHL transports. On the flip side, ambulances do not go on lift assists and evaluations. For a regular EMS call, you have 2 providers on the ambulance and 3-4 providers on the Fire Rig. I am on a truck company so I do not do transports, however I was previously on a small volunteer agency. With my volunteer agency, it was mostly just me and a driver, so I can definitely appreciate having 5-6 providers at a scene helping out.
|
|
|
|
Post by rodw on Mar 13, 2016 11:44:57 GMT
i agree with having fire rescues responding to all calls reason being not all areas have a dedicated ambulance in their area and could take upwards of 10-15 minutes for an ambulance to arrive on scene if I were a tax payer in these areas I would certainly question why the local department didn't respond to assist sooner
|
|
rod
New Member
Posts: 11 
|
Post by rod on Mar 15, 2016 23:44:55 GMT
i agree with having fire rescues responding to all calls reason being not all areas have a dedicated ambulance in their area and could take upwards of 10-15 minutes for an ambulance to arrive on scene if I were a tax payer in these areas I would certainly question why the local department didn't respond to assist sooner |
|
