[email protected]

In a message dated 6/17/03 7:51:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:

> Unless you are in the military and in a combat situation. In which case
> the
> person with the most minor injury "outranks" the more serious injury. The
> less serious the injury the quicker the return to battle. You cannot
> deplete
> your entire blood supply on one injured soldier.
> Pam G.
>
>
>

That is the opposite of what I was taught in Combat Medic school.
*~*Elissa Jill*~*
unschooling Momma to 3 beautiful brilliant people
Loving partner for life to Joey
terrible guitarist, fair singer and happy woman.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Have A Nice Day!

> Unless you are in the military and in a combat situation. In which case
> the
> person with the most minor injury "outranks" the more serious injury. The
> less serious the injury the quicker the return to battle. You cannot
> deplete
> your entire blood supply on one injured soldi



The principle of triage is to treat those who *can* be treated and hold those who can't or who won't benefit in the long run from the treatment.

For an obvious example, someone who is unconscious, in shock, with open abdominal injuries, will be passed by for someone with just a fractured leg, simply because time and resources only allow the medical team to treat those who will likely survive.

But in the case of a cut finger and a broken leg, the cut finger does not "outrank" the broken leg since both will survive. The broken leg will "outrank" the cut finger because both will survive, but the broken leg requires more emergent treatment than the cut finger.

It has nothing to do with who will return to the battle field. It has to do with limited time and resources in the field, and how to best use them to save the most lives.

And in less obvious situations, its a jugement call.

Kristen







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/18/03 2:51:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Earthmomma67@... writes:

> That is the opposite of what I was taught in Combat Medic school

Was an Army nurse for 4 years and have been in field situations many times.
5th MASH and the 5th MASH FAST team for a while. It is very true. In the
field you are concerned with returning a soldier to the battle. You need to
have a fighting force. Also resupply only occurs at certain times. Blood and
other medical supplies are limited. When there is a large amount of casualties
the more serious will sit in the back of the tent or will sit in a holding
area waiting to be transferred back. If transport doesn't come in time they may
in fact die waiting for treatment. Triage in war is the opposite than it is
for the civilian sector.
Pam G.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/18/03 3:04:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
litlrooh@... writes:

> It has nothing to do with who will return to the battle field. It has to
> do with limited time and resources in the field, and how to best use them to
> save the most lives.
>
> And in less obvious situations, its a jugement call.
>
>

I agree with the last statement. If injuries are minor it is a judgment call
for the physician. But in a battle situation it does have to do with a
fighting force.
Pam G.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/18/03 8:21:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, genant2@...
writes:

> Triage in war is the opposite than it is
> for the civilian sector.
>

Yeah, your're talking about REAL war. It's difficult to have to think
about, but in combat situations, things aren't pretty. I kept seeing scenes from
Saving Private Ryan, We Were Soldiers, Black Hawk Down, etc, while reading
your post. You have seen it first hand, what better testimony could there be
as to how injuries rank in combat than from a person who has actually
treated combat injuries.

Teresa


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]