Why not just call it the department of available medicine and we can all be
available specialists?
Shane
(its late at night and I had a bad day!)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dunn Matthew Dr. ACCIDENT & EMERGENCY - SwarkHosp-TR"
<[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, 10 October 2001 9:41
Subject: Re: casualty in BMJ
> > Casualty comes from the word casual attender i.e. someone
> > who could go
> > to hospital without a GP referral.
>
> I'd always thought of it as Adrian's derivation. This one makes sense,
> though. (Didn't it use to be called 'surgical outpatients').
> Name should be determined by what we do. If we spend most of our time
seeing
> medical emergencies, we're emergency physicians; if trauma,
traumatologists
> (if both, 'Emergency Physician and Traumatologist seems appropriately
> pompous); if minor injuries/ minor medical problems, we're minor injury
> specialists (longwinded, but I don't think 'Minor Physician' would be too
> popular within the specialty). If you triage away the problems that aren't
> true emergnecies, 'Emergency Doctor' seems about right (although possible
> public perception problem- sounds a bit close to 'Doctor of Last Resort').
> If we see and sort out whatever comes through the door, 'Casualty Doctor/
> Physician/ Surgeon seems pretty appropriate by the above derivation. If
you
> think the work is appropriate, there shouldn't be a problem with the term.
> If not, triage away/ take on other roles and leave the name to change
> itself.
> As to 'triage at best'. Bit of a problem with the image of triage. If
you're
> good at triage, it's good for patients and cost effective (being good at
it
> isn't easy though).
>
> Matt Dunn
> Work Generating Incompetent
|