Refused an ambulance

[maccapacca 10]

A DVT is a life threatening problem and should not be taken lightly . If a DVT travels to one of the major organs be it heart or lungs it is deadly . So the person talking garbege about just DVT is an idiot

 

I wasn't saying a dvt should be taken lightly, just that it doesn't require a 999 ambulance.

 

 

 

Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android

[vwcrazed 10]

In this instance it appears that the operator made a call based on the history given by the OP. Assuming that it was a DVT (blood clot) then a taxi is reasonable. Below knee DVTs can progress to become serious which is why medical attention is required. However they don't warrant an ambulance.

 

Do not spout utter wikipedia clap trap, this lady needed urgent attention. At any age a DVT is serious but at 67 years of age she would have needed a scan to find the clot, more than likely needed Fragmin injected for speedy treatment and a ECG to determine what if any irregularities her heart was showing,then admitting for observation and Warfarin given.

 

You did the correct thing Dolly, the NHS advice line is giving out so much bad advice they are putting peoples health at risk not helping. If Sheffield's so called paramedics are as unfit and unmotivated as Rotherham then you will expect more treatment like this in the future but take comfort in the fact that these issues are being looked into.

[Daisydoo! 10]

Doesn't help when people ring for Ambulances not once but twice in one night and they can't make there minds up if there going or not. Keep them waiting over an hour each time. Wasted on lowlife self inflicted p***head. While people cold be dying. Makes me sick. Complete drain on resources they should send them the bill

[fairyworld14 10]

I agree but when it is life threatening this should not be ignored

[Dannyno 19]

What if she had a blood clot in her foot and the ambulance turned her down? Odds are she would not be posting on here if she did because she would be dead.

 

The question is, what were the chances that it was a life threatening problem?

 

If you go to the NHS direct website, you can track symptoms and it will give you an assessment.

 

I had a go, and up came a big red "ring 999", based on the answers I gave to the various questions.

 

Now, it's certainly possible that mistakes could be made by NHS direct (and sometimes not culpably either), but presumably they will have asked the OP a series of questions, designed to indicate the nature of the problem and the likely risks associated with it.

 

In other words, they are [hopefully] not making an assessment of whether or not you might have a dangerous blood clot just on a statement that you have "a swelling". There's some questioning going on.

 

Try it on NHS direct yourself, there's a section there on swellings and you can follow it through.

 

I can understand the OP's upset, as lack of ambulance meant a more difficult journey. It would be great if alongside ambulances there was a system of non-urgent hospital transport in these circumstances.

 

But that doesn't mean it wasn't the correct advice (about which I have no idea, as we don't have all the information).

 

I do think the NHS need to recognise that many of us feel powerless when we're dealing with it, so that we get angry when things don't go the way we want them to. I understand about rationing and prioritising and all that, but at the end of the day it's people who are at the receiving end and we need a service with a human face, not a bureaucratic one.

 

---------- Post added 05-02-2013 at 23:35 ----------

 

just over a year ago my wife collapsed and could not stand up - this was after about 2/3 weeks attending the doctors with numbness and tingling in both her legs

an ambulance was called and refused telling us to go to a "walk in clinic"--which we did attend and I had to almost carry my wife to this clinic and after over an hour and 2 doctors making a decision that this was a case for our doctor----------a week later I paid to see a specialist and within 30 minutes she was admitted to the Hallamshire where she spent 10 weeks

after she had been in hospital 7 weeks the diagnosis was "sarcoidosis"

she lost over 2 stone and nearly her life

15 months after coming out of hospital she has just managed to walk again.

I got an apology from South Yorkshire Ambulances ==

The day she was refused an ambulance is a day she wont forget ---it was on her 67th birthday.

 

I did hear a program a couple of weeks ago that some people actually receive a bonus for getting a non attendance --

 

If someone actually has collapsed, then you wouldn't want to be ferrying them to hospital yourself, even if it's not a life threatening situation. If you had to physically carry her, that's an ambulance job, isn't it?

 

Sarcoidosis seems quite rare, so it wouldn't necessarily be straightforward to diagnose, I suppose. It wouldn't be top of the list of things the symptoms could be. I'm just going on this information, mind you: http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/sarcoidosis/

[tinfoilhat 11]

You can (could) get a device where if you fell over, someone from social services would come rushing to your aid. They weren't allowed to help you up ('elf and safety at it's worst) but they could ring an ambulance to get you stood up again. You don't need much more than a cold for Nhs direct to say "call an ambulance". Then there's the drunks. It seems odd they have very loose definitions to get an ambulance, but very strict definitions to bizarrely not get an ambulance like the op.

[Dannyno 19]

Why would they be liable, they have all taken the hippocratic oath and as such are professionally dedicated and trained to take such decisions.

 

Actually, most doctors don't take the hippocratic oath. They might possibly have some other ethical statement (which might be called a hippocratic oath) they sign up to maybe on graduation, but it's not likely to be the actual original hippocratic oath.

 

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath#Modern_use_and_relevance

[chemicalrose 10]

Sounds like the operator made the right call. I'm sure they had better things to be doing. If every DVT arrived in hospital by ambulance we'd need significantly more ambulance crews.

 

my mum collapsed with a DVT when I was only 3, she suffered a stroke as a result of that leaving her paralised down the whole left hand side of her body, doctors said that she should not have survived and chances are that she would suffer another DVT within a month or 2 but she would not survive the next....she did not suffer another thankfully but she spent the rest of her life in a wheel chair unable to even take herself to the toilet or get up out of a chair...our childhood was so very difficult to say the least.

 

DVT`s are so very serious so your statement above is just...well, im just lost for words!

 

I hope you never have to find out how a DVT can destroy your whole family, but maybe you could just take it on the chin...its not that serious after all!

[sjalsip 10]

There's a man on our road, an elderly man, who slowly losing the plot. He thought I was american the other day and told me to get back and leave his house alone. Anyway, he must have the ambulance and paramedic out at least twice a week. I don't think there's anything wrong with him at all, since he's off to the shops every morning even in the snow. Just, if they have guidelines to follow, I don't think they're following them with him.

[maccapacca 10]

Do not spout utter wikipedia clap trap, this lady needed urgent attention. At any age a DVT is serious but at 67 years of age she would have needed a scan to find the clot, more than likely needed Fragmin injected for speedy treatment and a ECG to determine what if any irregularities her heart was showing,then admitting for observation and Warfarin given.

 

You did the correct thing Dolly, the NHS advice line is giving out so much bad advice they are putting peoples health at risk not helping. If Sheffield's so called paramedics are as unfit and unmotivated as Rotherham then you will expect more treatment like this in the future but take comfort in the fact that these issues are being looked into.

 

Which bit of what I said was claptrap? If you've any experience of DVTs other than what you've read on the Internet then you'll know that most are treated as an outpatient. You appear to be confusing a DVT with a PE. DVTs haven't been routinely admitted for the last decade.

[Daven 10]

Which bit of what I said was claptrap? If you've any experience of DVTs other than what you've read on the Internet then you'll know that most are treated as an outpatient. You appear to be confusing a DVT with a PE. DVTs haven't been routinely admitted for the last decade.

 

People with a confirmed DVT need to have PE excluded which often means admission to hospital for CTPA, ddimers and sometimes cardiac echo depending on symptoms.

Many people will be discharged from hospital on treatment for DVT (high dose subcutaneous daltaparin and warfarin and regular anti coaggulation appointments until the INR is therapeutic).

 

 

---------- Post added 06-02-2013 at 10:00 ----------

 

There's a man on our road, an elderly man, who slowly losing the plot. He thought I was american the other day and told me to get back and leave his house alone. Anyway, he must have the ambulance and paramedic out at least twice a week. I don't think there's anything wrong with him at all, since he's off to the shops every morning even in the snow. Just, if they have guidelines to follow, I don't think they're following them with him.

 

If someone who is confused rings for an emergency ambulance it would be difficult for the operators to do anything else but send a paramedic to assess them since confusion can be a symptom of many other acute illnesses.

 

---------- Post added 06-02-2013 at 10:05 ----------

 

Last Thursday morning, when I tried to get out od bed, I found that I couldn't put my right foot to the floor. My foot was swollen and very painful. I eventually managed to hop to my living room, and call NHS Direct. Their advisor told me to go to A & E within the next 4 hours. As i have no means of transport other than public, I rang for an ambulance. I couldn't believe it when this was refused, despite the fact that I am 67 years old and live alone. I explained that I would have to hop down 2 corridors (about 30 yards_ to the entrance of my building and then a further 30/40 yards to the roadside to get in a taxi. This fell on deaf ears. With the help of an elderly man who lives in the same complex I eventually managed to make to hop to the taxi.

 

Please don't think that i am a person who always finds fault with the NHS, indeed I have twice in the last 10 years been very grateful to them, as both times I was near to death. Neither am I a person who calls for ambulances at the slightest excuse. But I honestly do think that I wasn't treated properly.

 

Whilst I am in no doubt that you were in pain and found it difficult to walk , your symptoms did not warrent an emergency ambulance. The fact that you were able to 'hop about 30 yards ' proves this.

 

---------- Post added 06-02-2013 at 10:06 ----------

 

I can assure you it wasn't just a case of a swollen foot. I certainly would not like to have put anybody elsea at risk. I still cannot walk and am having to wear a special boot.

 

So you don't have a DVT ? What a relief . Clearly the operator who assessed you was correct in advising you to make your own way to hospital.

Wishing you a speedy recovery anyway.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Daven

[francypants 441]

What really annoys me is the money spent on medicars ferrying people to and from out patients appointments. I know they are run by volunteers but they are paid expenses which must amount to a lot of money. A neighbour of mine always insisted on having one on her many hospital visits even though she was more than able to catch a bus ( catching a bus never stopped her going out to visit friends or go shopping ) A service which I think could be dispensed with.