Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Irish Rail Medical Emmergency

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    NewbridgeIR
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭NewbridgeIR


    I heard other people say that the lady had either fainted or collapsed on the train.


  • Options
    #33
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    NewbridgeIR wrote: »
    I heard other people say that the lady had either fainted or collapsed on the train.

    A 2 hour wait for an ambulance is riddiculous if the person fainted/collapsed that should be a priority call.


  • Options
    #34
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    A 2 hour wait for an ambulance is riddiculous if the person fainted/collapsed that should be a priority call.

    Priority? Ahead of cardiac arrest, a bleeder, a woman in labour, a person suffering a severe asthma attack, allergic reaction or epileptic fit?

    I'm a medical layman but a person fainting on a train doesn't sound like a priority call to me. And by the sound of it, the ambulance service didn't think so either.


  • Options
    #35
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    coylemj wrote: »
    Priority? Ahead of cardiac arrest, a bleeder, a woman in labour, a person suffering a severe asthma attack, allergic reaction or epileptic fit?

    I'm a medical layman but a person fainting on a train doesn't sound like a priority call to me. And by the sound of it, the ambulance service didn't think so either.

    Again I'm also a medical layman but I would thought a call would get priority if the person is unconscious. Considering the first question usually asked when you dial 999 is: is the person conscious and breathing?


  • Options
    #36
    Del2005
    Registered Users Posts: 18,897 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    Again I'm also a medical layman but I would thought a call would get priority if the person is unconscious. Considering the first question usually asked when you dial 999 is: is the person conscious and breathing?

    And once the answer to are they breathing is yes they are not a priority.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Qrt
    Registered Users Posts: 1,632 ✭✭✭Qrt


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    And how would one identify between a scumbag shouting abuse and someone with a "mental health issue".

    Sometimes you can, sometimes you can't. Anyway, your use of quotation marks doesn't give me much hope so i'll just leave it be.


  • Options
    #38
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    Del2005 wrote: »
    And once the answer to are they breathing is yes they are not a priority.

    I don't know but they could have had an underlying medical condition which caused them to faint such as diabetes.


  • Options
    #39
    john boye
    Registered Users Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭john boye


    Perhaps the person regained consciousness quickly enough?


  • Options
    #40
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    john boye wrote: »
    Perhaps the person regained consciousness quickly enough?

    True but that goes back to the question as to why the person couldn't have left the train. A bit of fresh air is generally a good thing for someone just after fainting I would think rather than being stuck on a stuffy train.


  • Options
    #41
    Atlantic Dawn
    Registered Users Posts: 81,295 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    If they couldn't get an ambulance to them in over 2 hours in Dublin City centre at 6pm on a weekday there is little hope if there's a major incident in the city. If they don't have ambulances available then they can't magically appear out of the blue in an emergency.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    john boye
    Registered Users Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭john boye


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    True but that goes back to the question as to why the person couldn't have left the train. A bit of fresh air is generally a good thing for someone just after fainting I would think rather than being stuck on a stuffy train.

    Yes I'm guessing we're missing a lot of the story here as what we have doesn't all make sense.


  • Options
    #43
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    john boye wrote: »
    Yes I'm guessing we're missing a lot of the story here as what we have doesn't all make sense.

    That's true we can only speculate here but what baffles me is if it was serious why it took an ambulance so long and if it was minor then how come the person couldn't have left the train and waited for the ambulance on the platform or the station concourse.


  • Options
    #44
    Del2005
    Registered Users Posts: 18,897 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    I don't know but they could have had an underlying medical condition which caused them to faint such as diabetes.

    We're dealing with triage of emergency calls not medical histories. If the person is breathing and has no other obvious issues they are not a priority regardless of why they have fainted/collapsed.


  • Options
    #45
    Jem72
    Registered Users Posts: 167 ✭✭Jem72


    The fact that the person is on a train should have something to do with the prioritisation of the ambulance. It is not unusual to have a spate of knock-on medical issues such as faintings when there is serious disruption going on. At the very least there needs to be a protocol in place that if triage deems that situation is not urgent and the condition doesn't particularly indicate that moving is dangerous (i.e. not a fall), then the person can be moved off the train into a station building.

    Irish Rail themselves could help matters by putting up directions similar to those we see in the UK indicating that you should move off the train and seek help at the next station if you're feeling unwell. Of course that would also require that stations would have better staffing levels.


  • Options
    #46
    CrabRevolution
    Registered Users Posts: 2,809 ✭✭✭CrabRevolution


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    Again I'm also a medical layman but I would thought a call would get priority if the person is unconscious. Considering the first question usually asked when you dial 999 is: is the person conscious and breathing?

    I've worked in emergency departments, generally if you're breathing you slip down the priority list.


  • Options
    #47
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,670 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Without knowing many details of the incident the wait would appear excessive, could well have been another mass evacuation onto tracks and which Ambulance operators was around could have had to sent a lot more than one.


  • Options
    #48
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    Without knowing many details of the incident the wait would appear excessive, could well have been another mass evacuation onto tracks and which Ambulance operators was around could have had to sent a lot more than one.

    'Mass evacuation onto tracks' :eek:

    Suggest you read post #17


  • Options
    #49
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,670 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    coylemj wrote: »
    'Mass evacuation onto tracks' :eek:

    Suggest you read post #17

    THe point being? There was still a train behind with up to 300 people onboard and all it would have taken is one to left and more to follow.

    Put it this way would the same person be left lying on the street for 90 minutes. I don't think so and IE should really raise what happened with DFB and NAS.


  • Options
    #50
    Del2005
    Registered Users Posts: 18,897 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    Put it this way would the same person be left lying on the street for 90 minutes. I don't think so and IE should really raise what happened with DFB and NAS.

    If their condition wasn't serious they would be as the location* of the incident has no bearing on the speed of response.



    * For non life threatening/hazardous locations.


  • Options
    #51
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,670 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Del2005 wrote: »
    If their condition wasn't serious they would be as the location* of the incident has no bearing on the speed of response.



    * For non life threatening/hazardous locations.

    Rubbish, not a chance of it happenong and there would be a significant backlash against DFB/NAS. I do accept cases are different but they really dropped the ball here. Wonder if IEs handling of the situation compounded things.

    45 minutes is likely the norm for most rail/tram related medical emergencies.

    Whatever happens IE need to get answers and find out if other factors were at play.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    prinzeugen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,891 ✭✭✭prinzeugen


    ED E wrote: »
    No org will dare move somebody in such a circumstance. Far too open to litigation.

    Not true. Good Samaritan clause covers that provided the person has the right training and there is a further risk to the injured or others.

    London Underground do it and its in the first aid training I have done here also.

    Get the person of the train unless its spinal etc.


  • Options
    #53
    Del2005
    Registered Users Posts: 18,897 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    prinzeugen wrote: »
    Not true. Good Samaritan clause covers that provided the person has the right training and there is a further risk to the injured or others.

    London Underground do it and its in the first aid training I have done here also.

    Get the person of the train unless its spinal etc.

    A first aider isn't trained to do body checks and even with boby checks you can miss internal injuries, so you can't move someone. The only time you can move someone is when there is a danger to them.


    Does the UK award €60k to people who hit their leg off a table? Because that's the culture companies face when dealing with the public. So dragging a person off a train would be a huge payout.


  • Options
    #54
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    Moving someone off a warm dry train on to a cold wet platform sounds somewhat inhumane to me, notwithstanding hundreds of people being held up.


  • Options
    #55
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    THe point being? There was still a train behind with up to 300 people onboard and all it would have taken is one to left and more to follow.

    That's what railway signalling is for. The train behind was held in Pearse and gradually trains were backed up at each of the stations down the line. There were no trains stuck between stations which would have necessitated a 'mass evacuation' for the simple reason that a train is not allowed to depart one station on that line unless the way is clear all the way to the platform at the next station and the level crossing gates between the two stations are all closed.

    I got stuck at Seapoint at 19:30 so in post #15 I estimated that based on there being a train stuck at each station up the line, the train containing the casualty would have been due at Tara St. at 18:19. Confirmed by poster NewbridgeIR (post #17) who was in Tara St when the train pulled in at 18:20.


  • Options
    #56
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    Isambard wrote: »
    Moving someone off a warm dry train on to a cold wet platform sounds somewhat inhumane to me, notwithstanding hundreds of people being held up.

    It wasn't even cold on Friday for start and even if was they could have used the station concourse.


  • Options
    #57
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,670 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    coylemj wrote: »
    That's what railway signalling is for. The train behind was held in Pearse and gradually trains were backed up at each of the stations down the line. There were no trains stuck between stations which would have necessitated a 'mass evacuation' for the simple reason that a train is not allowed to depart one station on that line unless the way is clear all the way to the platform at the next station and the level crossing gates between the two stations are all closed.

    I got stuck at Seapoint at 19:30 so in post #15 I estimated that based on there being a train stuck at each station up the line, the train containing the casualty would have been due at Tara St. at 18:19. Confirmed by poster NewbridgeIR (post #17) who was in Tara St when the train pulled in at 18:20.

    There was a train behind it, you directed me to a post which clearly states that. If it want the case it wouldn’t have been delayed 90 mins.

    Anyway its common for them to havw a train between Tara and Pearse at peak times (as soon as one arrives in Tara the next is sent out and usually gets stopped for a minute until Tara St is cleared) As soon as they become aware of a problem they ensure trains don’t get caught between stations however there are usually one or two that do.

    GCD-Connolly sections usually have trains between stations, if they didnt they couldn’t operate current peak schedules.


  • Options
    #58
    prinzeugen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,891 ✭✭✭prinzeugen


    Del2005 wrote: »
    A first aider isn't trained to do body checks and even with boby checks you can miss internal injuries, so you can't move someone. The only time you can move someone is when there is a danger to them.

    I was trained to do body checks. And that was a bog standard Occupational First Aid course. (Here in Ireland btw)

    There are of course situations where you should not move someone. Fainting on a train is not one of them.

    The Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011 part 3 protects a person with first aid training provided they act in good faith and did not conduct gross negligence or malice.

    Volunteers and people that expect payment are exempt. (Ie people that are paid for being a first aider).


Advertisement