Ventilator prioritisation

timmy_mallet

With the inevitable shortage in ventilators, if a surge occurs. Should we prioritise those who receive a ventilator. If so, how?

First in?
No smokers allowed?
Kids?
Elderly?

mickdw

Younger people in need will get them over old.

Fr_Dougal

How about we don’t turn into complete cunts and give them to the sickest patients on a first come basis?

endacl

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

How about we don’t turn into complete cunts and give them to the sickest patients on a first come basis?

Bet you’re an elderly smoker!

timmy_mallet

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

How about we don’t turn into complete cunts and give them to the sickest patients on a first come basis?

If theres one ventilator, and two people are equally sick, first in, you're suggesting?

Fr_Dougal

endacl wrote: »

Bet you’re an elderly smoker!

You’re wrong there.

odyssey06

timmy_mallet wrote: »

With the inevitable shortage in ventilators, if a surge occurs. Should we prioritise those who receive a ventilator. If so, how?

First in?
No smokers allowed?
Kids?
Elderly?

No I don't think any of those people should be the ones doing the prioritisting of who gets the ventilators.
We'll leave it to the triage process followed by medical professionals.

kowloon

So what you're saying is tell them you don't smoke?

johnmcdnl

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

How about we don’t turn into complete cunts and give them to the sickest patients on a first come basis?

Lets imagine a scenario where 1 patient is very sick and even with good care, doctors still believe they may die.
A second patient has a moderate condition, but without care may die, but with care has a good survival chance.
Should you prioritise the 'sickest patients on a first come basis' or should you instead try to prioritise the patient who may have the better survival chance, to try to avoid 2 potentials deaths at the cost of 1 probable death. It's an awful choice to have to make, and I am thankful I'm not in a the position where I need to make calls like that.

Unfortunately, this is the choice doctors will have to make, if the situation worsens, and if we see the hospitals swamped, this is a choice doctors will have to make often, while overworked and stressed.

pjohnson

If only we reacted sooner to avoid such a scenario.

Kivaro

How about obese people?
It is certainly going to be a moral dilemma for the life-deciders.

I was listening to a Spanish doctor this morning recounting how they immediately transfer the ventilator to the next in line without the usual protocol ....... because sanitising the equipment doesn't really matter in these cases. It was a battle for him not to follow standard protocols, as that is how he was trained.

Also saw an interview this morning of a wrecked ER doctor in Elmhurst, Queens, which is the front line of the front line (New York City in the USA, which will be the new epicenter). The man didn't sleep the night before because his daughter was starting her residency in Brooklyn that morning.

These people are the real heroes in this fight, and are deserving of all our admiration and respect.

never_mind

pjohnson wrote: »

If only we reacted sooner to avoid such a scenario.

Ah god you are so right!!!!! Omg!! I never thought of that!!!!

Beasty

timmy_mallet wrote: »

With the inevitable shortage in ventilators, if a surge occurs. Should we prioritise those who receive a ventilator. If so, how?

First in?
No smokers allowed?
Kids?
Elderly?

I really do not think this is an appropriate topic for discussion here. Let's not turn it into a debate about who is most "worthy". The HSE and its staff have a hard enough task without worrying about how some of their decisions may be looked at by some anonymous Boards posters