Ruth wrote:
>Our co-op was criticised recently by a consultant for not adequately assessing
>an ill child. He particularly mentioned that no attempt had been made to check
>pulse rate, temperature or respiratory rate.
>I sometimes wonder if we inhabit a different planet from our consultant
>colleagues.
I don't mean to be picky (or even worse take sides with a consultant!)
but I think pulse and resp rate are a not unreasonable request.
These are good objective markers of a sick child and I know I have
occasionally used pulse >160, or resp rate of >40 in children to flag
up a potentially ill child amongst the morass of snuffly noses that I
see.
And not least - but the resp rate is >60 - is a good counter to the
bastard when they ask "but what exactly is the temperature".
Unless, of course, you can afford one of these super-duper ear jobs,
in which case you just might have measured it.
[log in to unmask]
John McGuire
----------------------------------------------
If you must go to work tommorrow, well if
I were you I wouldn't bother for there are
brighter sides to life and I should know because
I've seen them, but not often
------------------------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|