Medevac OR Medevac??

[Tim]

Agreed with the one post about where the term MEDEVAC actually comes from. - and its misuse. All Air Ambulance operators in this country, save for rotary(on-site) response are merely patient transfer services. By local Health policy these patients are to be transfered when stable. And the transfers are usaully initiated from from a health facility where care is being provided. Or sure there may be times when a patient goes unstable--as there may be times when an aircraft goes unstable. This would be an appropriate time to request emergency priorrity handling.

stable does NOT mean its not a medical emergency. you can be critical and stable at the same time (i.e. burn victim, head trauma), in which case the minutes and seconds count.

i have absolutely NO problem using medevac all the time. if 3 or 4 flights have to slow down so a medevac can get in the queue first with a 'stable' patient, thats fine with me.

here's a scenario: what if someone dies 2 minutes out from the hospital because the pilot elected to omit medevac from the callsign and therefore flew for 10 extra minutes getting vectored in sequence.

people don't die because medevacs go in first, but they can if it's the other way around. simple as that.

[Cat Driver]

people don't die because medevacs go in first, but they can if it's the other way around. simple as that.

Using that benchmark to decide what is an emergency and what is not it would then stand to reason that every cop car and every ambulance that is moving should use their sirens and run red lights.....so they do not lose any time getting from A to B.

Hell yeh, that makes perfect sense.

[NO LINK*]

Yeah and its likely the same reason I use medevac all of the time eventhough it doesnt make sense.

Even us guys in the front end who arent supposed to know whats going on, can tell when things in the back are starting to go south. Even if I wasn't a medevac I think I could relay that information to ATC.

[Gannet167]

In Europe and I believe as an ICAO standard, "STS/HOSP" is used to identify hospital flights. I believe this is the equivalent of an ambulance with its lights off. It alerts ATC that you have a patient on board and *may* help with slot times etc. However officially, you get no preferential treatment. The sense of urgency could be upgraded, should the patient go sour, via ATC. Putting STS/HOSP on your flight plan will generally get Canadian ATC asking if your a medevac and treating you as such.

Perhaps Canada should adopt this to give some consideration to "hosp" flights, but reserving the "medevac" designation for true emergencies. A sprained finger, cold, empty aircraft with med staff returning to base etc. may be a "hosp" flight, but it sure isn't a medevac flight.

The argument seems to be whether crews should be using medevac status to get priority in situations where there is no real pressing emergency. This could be with patients that are stable, or with no patient at all but just med staff. Obviously, a very critically injured patient who is teetering on death is a genuine "medical evacuation" to save life and limb. But if you just have doctors on board or you're empty returning to base, you're definitely abusing the system.

You have to think WHY do you deserve priority over anyone else? If you have someone who will likely die shortly, then yep - you need priority. But if you have a doctor on board and you're flying home empty - why should you get priority over or be on par with, say a flight with a guy who is near death and a real medevac? Or a SAR flight going to get people who truly are in trouble? Surely you're not as important as the other flight is - just because something *could* happen (but hasn't yet) that would require you to become a medevac flight. Until that point, you're not special. Going to harvest organs etc. is understandable, there is a real and active situation requiring urgency. Returning home empty or with med staff is not a sense of urgency - until you're notified that there is a very sick patient waiting for you on arrival.

[Tim]

people don't die because medevacs go in first, but they can if it's the other way around. simple as that.

Using that benchmark to decide what is an emergency and what is not it would then stand to reason that every cop car and every ambulance that is moving [when responding to calls] should use their sirens and run red lights.....so they do not lose any time getting from A to B.

(ed note, i added "when responding to calls" because that must have been what you meant, since surely you can't think we fly around for the sake of flying calling ourselves a medevac just to cut people off. and that, as a rational person, you understand that flying an aircraft with a team of specialized medical professionals to give medical care to someone in no way equates to driving around in an empty cop car and trivializes the fact it takes dozen of dedicated employees doing everything they can to try to save life and limb.)


chucky, thats why the lights and sirens are there.

[twotter]

chucky, thats why the lights and sirens are there.

I am posting from a friends computer Tim.

I am sure I was flying medevacs before you were born and there was no way we would expect preferential treatment from air traffic control unless there was a genuine need for same. So please do not get condesending with me here on the forum.

It was bad enough to be associated with a system that abused the medevac service and used it hoping to get charter or sked service in below safe weather conditions without us personally abusing the system just to cue jump.

. . ( Cat Driver. )

[Tim]

chucky, thats why the lights and sirens are there.

I am sure I was flying medevacs before you were born and there was no way we would expect preferential treatment from air traffic control unless there was a genuine need for same. So please do not get condesending with me here on the forum.

Yeah, no. EDITED

[Canoehead]

There is an easy way to determine if you are to use the MEDEVAC term with your flight number.

If you are waiting at the airport for your patient to arrive in the rig, and they show up with lights (and sirens if required) going (that would be a code 4), you are a MEDEVAC. If they arrive at the airport at a leisurely pace with no lights on, you have no right using the MEDEVAC call sign. Period. Now, if your medics tap you on the shoulder en route to the destination and say 'we are now code 4' or 'we are upgrading to medevac' or 'you better get us there as fast as you safely can', then you are entitled to call yourself MEDEVAC.

You are also entitled to use the MEDEVAC call sign if you are positioning empty to pick up a patient to be moved as a MEDEVAC.

However, using the MEDEVAC call sign for code 1, 2 or 3 transfers (or positioning empty) is irresponsible and to those who know how the system is designed to work, you look like a fool.

[zzjayca]

For all of you abusing the system (and justifying it by saying no one dies if I jump the queue) go right ahead. I delay MEDEVACs all the time...for other MEDEVACs. Who knows, maybe the MEDEVAC I delayed for you is an actual MEDEVAC (ie. requires priority ATS handling) and the patient on board who is critical, may die as a result.

[Cat Driver]

I believe it is this attitude that creates so much dissent in this group.

i have absolutely NO problem using medevac all the time.

I also believe such an attitude is unprofessional.

[Doc]

stable does NOT mean its not a medical emergency. you can be critical and stable at the same time (i.e. burn victim, head trauma), in which case the minutes and seconds count.

i have absolutely NO problem using medevac all the time. if 3 or 4 flights have to slow down so a medevac can get in the queue first with a 'stable' patient, thats fine with me.

here's a scenario: what if someone dies 2 minutes out from the hospital because the pilot elected to omit medevac from the callsign and therefore flew for 10 extra minutes getting vectored in sequence.

people don't die because medevacs go in first, but they can if it's the other way around. simple as that.

How about tooth aches, Tim? Or.."I'm hungry..." Or missed medical appointments because they just "happened" to miss the Bearskin/Wasaya etc,. sked? Tim, I've flown medevac, on and off for several years....MOST...the absolute MAJORITY are really NOT medevacs at all. Either you work for Ornge, and are defending the obvious (to anyone with 1/2 a brain) abuse of the system, or you have never been there, or done that.
I've had 300 punders "need" to be carried onto the airplane on a stretcher, just to hop up and walk to a waiting cab (not an ambulance, BTW) and piss off into Winnipeg. Nobody is talking about seriously ill folks who are "stable". This ain't OUR first rodeo there, Tim. Must be yours.

[Doc]

For all of you abusing the system (and justifying it by saying no one dies if I jump the queue) go right ahead. I delay MEDEVACs all the time...for other MEDEVACs. Who knows, maybe the MEDEVAC I delayed for you is an actual MEDEVAC (ie. requires priority ATS handling) and the patient on board who is critical, may die as a result.

Well stroked!
Take priority for the hang nail on your aircraft. YOUR MOTHER might be on the aircraft YOU sent into a vector because you call yourself a "medevac"! BTW, your MOTHER just became a Code 5. That's freight, BTW.

[Doc]

One of my favourite "Ornge tricks" is picking up their clearance in front of their hangar in YXL, then doing all their checklists and preflight rituals, thereby securing their departure number one status, while other aircraft must sit and wait for the PC12 to wander to the active, at their leisure. You can be going VFR, but you must wait till these guys feel like taxiing. I've seen this performance on at least four occasions, and I'm not even based there.
I do know of one occasion that Ornge flew with "medevac" status from YXL to Toronto City Centre, to move a few paramedics to Buttonville! They wouldn't take a cab. I don't make this up.
Tim...you still think it's Okay to file every trip as a "medevac"?

[NO LINK*]

Let's install cameras in all air ambulance aircraft so we know who is telling the truth

and being professional





your momma (code 5)

[aftstrake]

edited

[tca]

I for one, certainly side with the "A-Hole" in any debate.

Well of course you take your own side!!!

Just kidding. I have met you in real life, and while I don't necessarily agree with everything you say, I do value your opinion, and totally agree with you with respect to this topic.

[sakism]

How about tooth aches, Tim? Or.."I'm hungry..." Or missed medical appointments because they just "happened" to miss the Bearskin/Wasaya etc,. sked? Tim, I've flown medevac, on and off for several years....MOST...the absolute MAJORITY are really NOT medevacs at all.

While I do share your opinion on this matter - this is not really the discussion at hand.

I ONLY fly medevacs.
I do not determine if the flight I am doing is a medevac - because they are all medevacs.

That determination is made by the staff at the nursing stations/hospitals in the communities that I serve. As I understand it they determine if a medevac is necessary based upon their ability to handle the situation - if it is beyond their skills, equipment or knowledge they call for a medevac.

At that point it has been determined that they need medical treatment elsewhere. Who am I to then decide that they should have gone on a sched flight the next day? Who do you think should be the one to make that call? There is no one available who is more qualified to make that call than the person who called for the medevac in the first place - ergo the flight is a medevac flight.

For the record - the company I work for also flies many people who are travelling for medical appointments - these flights are not filed as medevac flights, ever.

I think, perhaps, part of the problem is arising from the fact that the areas under discussion are very different from each other. I also do not understand medevac flights that are going from Toronto to Montreal or Ottawa, etc. They are leaving somewhere with adequate infrastructure and going to the same situation. This is a patient transfer as far as I'm concerned and should not be a medevac - mostly because there is no EVAC being performed.

[fish4life]

I think, perhaps, part of the problem is arising from the fact that the areas under discussion are very different from each other. I also do not understand medevac flights that are going from Toronto to Montreal or Ottawa, etc. They are leaving somewhere with adequate infrastructure and going to the same situation. This is a patient transfer as far as I'm concerned and should not be a medevac - mostly because there is no EVAC being performed.

After spending a few days in the hospital in Kenora my friend was required to be transferred to Winnipeg, where he is from. Even though this was not an Evac they seemed to deem it necessary to use the government air citation (lifeflight) which is only reserved for the most serious cases in MB are you telling me that should not have been a "medevac" because it was a transfer and not an Evac?

[NO LINK*]

are you telling me that should not have been a "medevac" because it was a transfer and not an Evac?

Yes. The MEDEVAC call is abused when a stable patient is on board.

It makes no difference who is attending the patient, whether or not the patient is on a public aircraft, or whether the patient has to spend 5 more minutes on the aircraft when he/she/it is stable.

[Doc]

I think, perhaps, part of the problem is arising from the fact that the areas under discussion are very different from each other. I also do not understand medevac flights that are going from Toronto to Montreal or Ottawa, etc. They are leaving somewhere with adequate infrastructure and going to the same situation. This is a patient transfer as far as I'm concerned and should not be a medevac - mostly because there is no EVAC being performed.

After spending a few days in the hospital in Kenora my friend was required to be transferred to Winnipeg, where he is from. Even though this was not an Evac they seemed to deem it necessary to use the government air citation (lifeflight) which is only reserved for the most serious cases in MB are you telling me that should not have been a "medevac" because it was a transfer and not an Evac?

Just because they used the government's Citation does not make it a "medevac". They could use a space shuttle. It's still just a transfer. A "medevac" is a "status" used by crews requesting/requiring priority handling by ATC to ensure the most expedient possible means of transport. The type of aircraft has nothing to do with it. A Cessna 172 can claim "medevac" status if there is a situation with a passenger that requires immediate attention by a medical professional.

[Flying Nutcracker]

It's funny that on the odd occasion we have a guest onboard our airplane that all of a sudden is less than well, we will call MedLink who in turn will tell us to administer Orange Juice to the guest and they will arrange Paramedics to assist at the gate at the arrival airport, and somehow... ATC most of the time will know that we are being met by paramedics and will offer us priority on arrival at our destination, even though there is no urgency or critical illness involved...

IMHO, any time you carry a patient, be it critical or stable, you are carrying a human being who is not really supposed to be in an airplane. I would like to see priority given to any individual who is under medical care, as much I would like to be at the front of the line-up when I show up at the Emergency at a hospital...

Just an opinion...

FN

[kevenv]

This is what ATC's definition of a Medevac is:

MEDEVAC — A term used to request Air Traffic Service priority handling for a medical evacuation
flight, based on a medical emergency in the transport of patients, organ donors, organs or other urgently
needed life-saving medical material. The term is to be used on flight plans and if a pilot determines that
a priority is required in radiotelephony communications.

A further note in our books deal with US Military and assigning priority:

U.S. Military AIR EVAC and MED EVAC flights are
exceptions; priority is only granted on request.