Flying Safe - Medics Onboard Qantas

[artemis]

I'm a medico and unfortunately I have learnt to temper my training/natural inclination with pragmatism whenever I am out of my normal working environment. Sometimes it is not strictly the law that applies.

I recount a story from an American surgeon (obstetrician) who, after rendering assistance, reached his middle east destination. His passport was confiscated at immigration, led into an interrogation area, refused contact with the outside world, and curiously could not find an English speaking person to communicate with. After several uncomfortable hours, the penny dropped when he was asked about his medical credentials. It appeared the person he treated is a relative of a connected family. He was then released, finished his conference, and left the country vowing never to return. When describing the clinical management, I can't see where any problem was - we assume it was either personality clash, social mores broken unknowingly, who knows (admittedly the story is only from his perspective).

No laws broken. No charges laid. No official case law or medical write up, just anedoctal.

Just to be clear - obstetricians are NOT surgeons!

 

[drron]

But if he called himself a Gynaecologist who also delivered babies he would be a surgeon.

 

[ozkid]

Just to be clear - obstetricians are NOT surgeons!

Ouch! Not going there.
Though I really really really wish obstetricians/gynaecologists would learn how to use a Veress properly, or better still not at all

 

[artemis]

But if he called himself a Gynaecologist who also delivered babies he would be a surgeon.

Respectfully - no. They are not surgeons, they don't receive surgical training. There are some exceptional gynaes out there who are technically very gifted surgeons, and some gynae-oncs who are spectacular, but they are not surgeons. And never will be. Same with people who do cosmetic "surgery"...

Just because one has a job where cutting is involved, that does not make them a surgeon.

And they can sometimes be women too!

 

[artemis]

Ouch! Not going there.
Though I really really really wish obstetricians/gynaecologists would learn how to use a Veress properly, or better still not at all

Yup.

Or just ask for help if you're stuck...

 

[medhead]

IME Gynaes have perfected wallet surgery. Leaving most other doctors in the dust.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Now this has been a thoroughly entertaining thread.......reminiscent of listening to all the bullsh*t tales down at the local fishing club....."I gotta bigger one then you"....but to hark back to the OPs first post, congratulations to all the professionals who put their hand up and offer help when needed and if I'm ever offered a Gynae (is that the correct abbreviation in the parallel universe of medicos) then I'll know they've had way too many champers and I need that second call for a QC to the QP to administer a writ!

 

[medhead]

Gynae (?) - I just didn't want to get in trouble with the spelling police. Gynaecologist. There you go, I can spell it.

 

[coolkid101]

Just to be clear - obstetricians are NOT surgeons!

haha. spoken like a true surgeon. the number of times i've seen the gynaes wreck havoc in theatre and not be able to fix their mistakes is truly shocking. they should not be allowed to open an abdomen until they've at least had ANY proper basic surgical training (not see one, do one, teach one)

 

[Anna]

I recount a story from an American surgeon (obstetrician) who, after rendering assistance, reached his middle east destination. His passport was confiscated at immigration, led into an interrogation area, refused contact with the outside world, and curiously could not find an English speaking person to communicate with. After several uncomfortable hours, the penny dropped when he was asked about his medical credentials. It appeared the person he treated is a relative of a connected family. He was then released, finished his conference, and left the country vowing never to return. When describing the clinical management, I can't see where any problem was - we assume it was either personality clash, social mores broken unknowingly, who knows (admittedly the story is only from his perspective).

No laws broken. No charges laid. No official case law or medical write up, just anedoctal.

Dude, seriously? A completely unverifiable piece of hearsay that led to nothing other than inconvenience and replete with "it appeared" and "we assume" - this proves absolutely nothing. For all we know he was stopped in the unnamed "middle east destination" because his visa wasn't correct for the conference, because his luggage looked suspect or for any number of other possible reasons including that the immigration officials just didn't like the look of an American.

If you think that this shows that doctors need to take more than their usual amount of professional care when treating someone on a plane then all I can say is - watch out for that meteor.

 

[ozkid]

Dude, seriously? A completely unverifiable piece of hearsay

You really do fly off the handle don't you? I know the person in question

 

[medhead]

Dude, seriously? A completely unverifiable piece of hearsay that led to nothing other than inconvenience and replete with "it appeared" and "we assume" - this proves absolutely nothing. For all we know he was stopped in the unnamed "middle east destination" because his visa wasn't correct for the conference, because his luggage looked suspect or for any number of other possible reasons including that the immigration officials just didn't like the look of an American.

If you think that this shows that doctors need to take more than their usual amount of professional care when treating someone on a plane then all I can say is - watch out for that meteor.

Dude! Dude seriously? Dude!!

We needs to talk dude

You really do fly off the handle don't you? I know the person in question

Hahahahahahahahahahaha fly off the handle? PMSL. Dude seriously!!! That's sooooo F'ing funny.

 

[RooFlyer]

I bet the dwh97, the OP with his second ever post, is just going :shock: :shock: :shock: .

If we haven't scared you off, can you share your thoughts about, oh, I don't know .... something safe, like politics? :mrgreen:

 

[coolkid101]

I bet the dwh97, the OP with his second ever post, is just going :shock: :shock: :shock: .

If we haven't scared you off, can you share your thoughts about, oh, I don't know .... something safe, like politics? :mrgreen:

are you proposing to start a thread on that? i daresay it might get heated in there.

 

[coolkid101]

here's something more light-hearted .. it's an oldie but a goodie

What's the difference between a physician, a surgeon, a psychiatrist, and a pathologist ?


The physician knows everything and does nothing.
The surgeon knows nothing and does everything.
The psychiatrist knows nothing and does nothing.
The pathologist knows everything, but always a week too late.

 

[coolkid101]

and one of my bosses used to ask this all the time to our medical students - "what's the difference between a surgeon and a physician?"

 

[ozkid]

As I am having my cup of coffee contemplating this thread, I have decided to run a clinical trial to bring some science into this discussion rather than the current opprobrium.

Title:
Perceptions of Health professionals to in-flight Airline evenTs (PHAT) trial

Design:
observational, prospective, single centre, unblinded, convenience sample survey. Researchers will interrupt life saving surgery to administer a verbal questionnaire on health professionals' attitudes

Primary Outcome:
Proportion of health professionals who would and would not render assistance to an inflight medical event

Secondary Outcomes:
1. subgroup analysis of proportions based on care giver type; hypothesis being that nurses (most caring), anaesthetists (somewhat caring), and surgeons (least caring) would differ in their willingness to render assistance
2. proportions of health professionals understanding of legal issues surrounding in flight events

Statistical Analysis:
simple descriptive statistics. Dichotomising groups to medical and nursing, and applying Fishers exact test to determine association with willingness to render assistance. No sample size calculation applies to this observational trial, though the researchers will attempt n=30 because every other small, underpowered trial wants to pass off as normalised data

Limitations:
Gynaecologists, despite known reservations, will be included in the surgical subgroup. There are only 2 on the floor today, as the rest have flown F to Las Vegas for a conference

Stage 1. Creation of the questionnaire. Updates to follow.

 

[artemis]

As I am having my cup of coffee contemplating this thread, I have decided to run a clinical trial to bring some science into this discussion rather than the current opprobrium.

Title:
Perceptions of Health professionals to in-flight Airline evenTs (PHAT) trial

Design:
observational, prospective, single centre, unblinded, convenience sample survey. Researchers will interrupt life saving surgery to administer a verbal questionnaire on health professionals' attitudes

Primary Outcome:
Proportion of health professionals who would and would not render assistance to an inflight medical event

Secondary Outcomes:
1. subgroup analysis of proportions based on care giver type; hypothesis being that nurses (most caring), anaesthetists (somewhat caring), and surgeons (least caring) would differ in their willingness to render assistance
2. proportions of health professionals understanding of legal issues surrounding in flight events

Statistical Analysis:
simple descriptive statistics. Dichotomising groups to medical and nursing, and applying Fishers exact test to determine association with willingness to render assistance. No sample size calculation applies to this observational trial, though the researchers will attempt n=30 because every other small, underpowered trial wants to pass off as normalised data

Limitations:
Gynaecologists, despite known reservations, will be included in the surgical subgroup. There are only 2 on the floor today, as the rest have flown F to Las Vegas for a conference

Stage 1. Creation of the questionnaire. Updates to follow.

It will never pass peer-review if you insist on including Ob/Gyn in the surgical subgroup!

They don't do everything as per Coolkid101's definition: they have only three operations (cut the left ureter/cut the right ureter/cut both ureters).

 

[Anna]

You really do fly off the handle don't you? I know the person in question

Stooping to personal attacks because your arguments have been demonstrated to be utterly unmeritorious?

 

[Princess Fiona]

As I am having my cup of coffee contemplating this thread, I have decided to run a clinical trial to bring some science into this discussion rather than the current opprobrium.

Title:
Perceptions of Health professionals to in-flight Airline evenTs (PHAT) trial

Design:
observational, prospective, single centre, unblinded, convenience sample survey. Researchers will interrupt life saving surgery to administer a verbal questionnaire on health professionals' attitudes

Primary Outcome:
Proportion of health professionals who would and would not render assistance to an inflight medical event

Secondary Outcomes:
1. subgroup analysis of proportions based on care giver type; hypothesis being that nurses (most caring), anaesthetists (somewhat caring), and surgeons (least caring) would differ in their willingness to render assistance
2. proportions of health professionals understanding of legal issues surrounding in flight events

Statistical Analysis:
simple descriptive statistics. Dichotomising groups to medical and nursing, and applying Fishers exact test to determine association with willingness to render assistance. No sample size calculation applies to this observational trial, though the researchers will attempt n=30 because every other small, underpowered trial wants to pass off as normalised data

Limitations:
Gynaecologists, despite known reservations, will be included in the surgical subgroup. There are only 2 on the floor today, as the rest have flown F to Las Vegas for a conference

Stage 1. Creation of the questionnaire. Updates to follow.

Oohh!! Harsh