>
>>Well said Robbie - and apologies for the cheeky post Doc - I was
>>remembering
>>your enthusiasm for the service! I was a bit daunted at Charles statement
>>though - if you think telephone triage isn't much good.......how come its
>>now being pumped all over the world? It originated in the States and we
>>thought you loved it!?
>
>In order to clarify :
>It's not good at reducing ER visits
>For which purpose it was initially designed
>There lies the disappointment & also the initial topic
>Otherwise people are very satisfied with it
>It is an added service
>I am not aware of any studies purporting it as saved live or money
>The only two reason for introducing new services in cash strapped cost
>cutting Canada
>
>
>Charles Brault EMT-P
>
To summarise...
It does not reduce A&E workload.
It does not reduce GP workload.
There is no evidence of any benefit yet.
BUT, people are satisfied with it, which is not surprising, as it is exactly
the reason for which governments all over the place invest in it: satisfaied
people = successful spin.
As mentioned a few times: Education is the answer (NOT to everything), and
not via the phone at the time of the acute event. There are better ways.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|