Paramedic equipment varies in quality and accessibility from area to area. What is standard issue for paramedics in rural Australia will be different to paramedic equipment used in downtown Tokyo, or by highway paramedics on the freeways leading out of LA.
Regardless of regional variations, paramedic equipment has some universal qualities that bely the necessities of the work. Equipment that has stood the test of time and been adapted into regular EMT usage is rugged, reliable, and user-friendly.
Paramedics are responsible for saving lives, easing pain, and managing medical emergencies. This means that they need to be able to rely on their equipment to do what it’s meant to do, time and again, without error or mishap. Faulty EMT equipment can directly cost lives, and that’s unacceptable.
For that reason, paramedic equipment is tested as rigorously as military hardware, and with much the same results. With EMT’s all over the world answering literally millions of calls each day, a ruthless Darwinian process is in place.
Administrators and engineers make many of the top-level decisions in terms of equipment allocation, design, and systems management. But every day, it’s the front-line troops that need to deal with the consequences of those decisions, triage efficiently, and match the procedures and protocols they’ve been given with the harsh and variable realities of hands-on emergency medicine.
Where issues can arise is when administrators – invariably those removed from hands-on experience by time or position – make decisions that adversely affect a paramedic’s capacity to get the job done.
As medical diagnostic, treatment and supportive technology increases in complexity, technologically advanced paramedic groups face a dilemma. Adoption of the newest technologies means that they can treat patients with a higher survival and success rate than previously, as long as the equipment functions and they can operate it to a high standard of proficiency.
Obviously, paramedics are extremely highly trained professionals. They take pride in their jobs, and constant professional development is a characteristic of a highly able paramedic force. Despite this, there is only a limited amount of time physically available for learning new technology and techniques as well as maintaining the already massive breadth of knowledge required to be a competent paramedic.
The increase complexity of paramedic equipment also opens up the risk of systemic or technological failure. Simple, non-digital tools have a greater life expectance and fewer single points of catastrophic failure than electrical or computer-managed tools.
If non-digital equipment fails, then there is an opportunity for a resourceful paramedic to effect an emergence fix or live patch to the tool. At the very least, the issue is normally immediately visible and a decision can be made, under pressure, how to respond to the new situation.
This is seldom the case with digital equipment. Because of the necessary complexity of diagnosing and treating electronic equipment, a single malfunction or unexpected circumstance can reduce a piece of equipment from a life-saving tool to a useless piece of plastic and metal.
Invariably, the most commonly used paramedic equipment is going to be simple and rugged. This is an excellent demonstration of what’s commonly called the Pareto Principle, or the 80/20 rule, except that in the case of EMT equipment it’s more like 95/5 or even 99/1.
The vast majority of situations that an EMT will be called to can be resolved using the most commonly used procedures and equipment. Only in very rare circumstances do paramedics need to go outside the norm in dealing with emergencies.
Regardless of regional variations, paramedic equipment has some universal qualities that bely the necessities of the work. Equipment that has stood the test of time and been adapted into regular EMT usage is rugged, reliable, and user-friendly.
Paramedics are responsible for saving lives, easing pain, and managing medical emergencies. This means that they need to be able to rely on their equipment to do what it’s meant to do, time and again, without error or mishap. Faulty EMT equipment can directly cost lives, and that’s unacceptable.
For that reason, paramedic equipment is tested as rigorously as military hardware, and with much the same results. With EMT’s all over the world answering literally millions of calls each day, a ruthless Darwinian process is in place.
Administrators and engineers make many of the top-level decisions in terms of equipment allocation, design, and systems management. But every day, it’s the front-line troops that need to deal with the consequences of those decisions, triage efficiently, and match the procedures and protocols they’ve been given with the harsh and variable realities of hands-on emergency medicine.
Where issues can arise is when administrators – invariably those removed from hands-on experience by time or position – make decisions that adversely affect a paramedic’s capacity to get the job done.
As medical diagnostic, treatment and supportive technology increases in complexity, technologically advanced paramedic groups face a dilemma. Adoption of the newest technologies means that they can treat patients with a higher survival and success rate than previously, as long as the equipment functions and they can operate it to a high standard of proficiency.
Obviously, paramedics are extremely highly trained professionals. They take pride in their jobs, and constant professional development is a characteristic of a highly able paramedic force. Despite this, there is only a limited amount of time physically available for learning new technology and techniques as well as maintaining the already massive breadth of knowledge required to be a competent paramedic.
The increase complexity of paramedic equipment also opens up the risk of systemic or technological failure. Simple, non-digital tools have a greater life expectance and fewer single points of catastrophic failure than electrical or computer-managed tools.
If non-digital equipment fails, then there is an opportunity for a resourceful paramedic to effect an emergence fix or live patch to the tool. At the very least, the issue is normally immediately visible and a decision can be made, under pressure, how to respond to the new situation.
This is seldom the case with digital equipment. Because of the necessary complexity of diagnosing and treating electronic equipment, a single malfunction or unexpected circumstance can reduce a piece of equipment from a life-saving tool to a useless piece of plastic and metal.
Invariably, the most commonly used paramedic equipment is going to be simple and rugged. This is an excellent demonstration of what’s commonly called the Pareto Principle, or the 80/20 rule, except that in the case of EMT equipment it’s more like 95/5 or even 99/1.
The vast majority of situations that an EMT will be called to can be resolved using the most commonly used procedures and equipment. Only in very rare circumstances do paramedics need to go outside the norm in dealing with emergencies.