Adrian Fogarty wrote:
> I certainly practise this way, i.e. not immobilising the walk-in
> patients unless there's a pretty impressive "historical" reason to do
> so. Mechanism history is everything.
Hi Adrian
I worry that such statements get taken out of context, so please humour me
with what I think might be some clarification (and please tell me if you
think I am wrong!).
Absence of mechanism = no immobilisation
Mechanism = assess and consider immobilisation.
This becomes very important in the remote setting.
An 'add on':
Do folks think the issue of analgesia (I am thinking particularly
'pre-hospital' here), is significant. The potential issue being that the
self-protector becomes a non-protector.
I came across a potential example of this on a ski-hill recently.
Someone who I think was 'manageable' (co-operative) who had neck/back pain,
following significant mechanism, was 'snowed' by the attending person -
before packaging. There was an impression that the person could have been
packaged before being snowed - if indeed that latter was necessary at all.
Just wondering about the risk/benefit here - not sure I have a clear
understanding or opinion.
Regards all
Jel Coward
|