Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

[Guest guest]

Sal,

So what your saying is, that if one your pts, calls your service on

an emergency, you would respond from whereever you are instead of

directing them to call 9-1-1 and possibly get a closer ambulance or

Fire first responder? And there are still plenty of services

that " jump " calls in the RGV.

Danny

> > >

> > > > The National Academy of EMD is affiliated with

> > Dr.

> > > > Clawson and his *proprietary* method of

> > Emergency

> > > > Medical Dispatching, correct?

> > > >

> > > > Would that be like Zoll, , or

> > PhysioControl

> > > > saying that defibrillation only works when you

> > use

> > > > their device? Or perhaps like a college or

> > training

> > > > program saying that EMS only works when the EMTs

> > and

> > > > paramedics are graduates of their school?

> > > >

> > > > In my opinion, there's too many proprietary

> > > > solutions out there for EMS. EMD/MPDS and the

> > > > various other " card " courses all fall into that

> > > > category. Some marketing guru finds a niche,

> > then

> > > > starts claiming their product/system is the

> > > > " standard of care, " and lo and behold, the

> > lemmings

> > > > of EMS follow behind.

> > > >

> > > > We've got to get away from proprietary methods

> > and

> > > > move towards open-source standards that are

> > backed

> > > > by research.

> > > >

> > > > -Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

> > > > Austin, Texas

> > > >

> > > > Re: EMD Dispatching

> > > > Controversy?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , I just forwarded this email to Carlynn

> > Page

> > > > of the National Academy Of

> > > > EMD, we'll see what the answer is!

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > > > removed]

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

[Guest guest]

Sal,

I don't recall being taught to use the MPDS codes on the radio when I became

an EMD way back in the early 90’s. The codes were used to keep dispatchers from

having to type in the entire description when entering the call into the CAD.

Some services may be using those codes in their radio traffic, but I can’t say

why. As far as I know the use of these codes in radio traffic was not the

intention of the creator, Dr. Clawson.

Tater

salvador capuchino wrote:

okay guys, I guess I mentioned the wrong topic. I am

not accusing any service that uses MPDS of just doing

it to hide calls. But maybe that was one intention of

the creator was to hide the traffic the same way 10

codes do to those not familiar with the system. I do

not think there is any service here in the RGV any

longer that jumps calls. Now the pt usually calls

direct. So anyway, it doesn't matter

Sal

--- " E. Tate " wrote:

> Exactly how does MPDS accomplish this?? Are you

> dispatched using some kind of code? If so, who

> cares?

>

> Does this have something to do with their ability

> (or inability) to " jump " calls?

>

>

> Tater

>

>

>

>

> Danny wrote:

>

> ,

>

> Let me shed some light, I work the largest and the

> only 9-1-1

> provider that is using MPDS in our county. Sal works

> in this county

> also. By using MPDS sal thinks the are 'hiding

> traffic' from everyone

> that is scanning our frequencies.

>

> Danny

>

> >

> > > The National Academy of EMD is affiliated with

> Dr.

> > > Clawson and his *proprietary* method of

> Emergency

> > > Medical Dispatching, correct?

> > >

> > > Would that be like Zoll, , or

> PhysioControl

> > > saying that defibrillation only works when you

> use

> > > their device? Or perhaps like a college or

> training

> > > program saying that EMS only works when the EMTs

> and

> > > paramedics are graduates of their school?

> > >

> > > In my opinion, there's too many proprietary

> > > solutions out there for EMS. EMD/MPDS and the

> > > various other " card " courses all fall into that

> > > category. Some marketing guru finds a niche,

> then

> > > starts claiming their product/system is the

> > > " standard of care, " and lo and behold, the

> lemmings

> > > of EMS follow behind.

> > >

> > > We've got to get away from proprietary methods

> and

> > > move towards open-source standards that are

> backed

> > > by research.

> > >

> > > -Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

> > > Austin, Texas

> > >

> > > Re: EMD Dispatching

> > > Controversy?

> > >

> > >

> > > , I just forwarded this email to Carlynn

> Page

> > > of the National Academy Of

> > > EMD, we'll see what the answer is!

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > > removed]

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

Sal,

I don't recall being taught to use the MPDS codes on the radio when I became

an EMD way back in the early 90’s. The codes were used to keep dispatchers from

having to type in the entire description when entering the call into the CAD.

Some services may be using those codes in their radio traffic, but I can’t say

why. As far as I know the use of these codes in radio traffic was not the

intention of the creator, Dr. Clawson.

Tater

salvador capuchino wrote:

okay guys, I guess I mentioned the wrong topic. I am

not accusing any service that uses MPDS of just doing

it to hide calls. But maybe that was one intention of

the creator was to hide the traffic the same way 10

codes do to those not familiar with the system. I do

not think there is any service here in the RGV any

longer that jumps calls. Now the pt usually calls

direct. So anyway, it doesn't matter

Sal

--- " E. Tate " wrote:

> Exactly how does MPDS accomplish this?? Are you

> dispatched using some kind of code? If so, who

> cares?

>

> Does this have something to do with their ability

> (or inability) to " jump " calls?

>

>

> Tater

>

>

>

>

> Danny wrote:

>

> ,

>

> Let me shed some light, I work the largest and the

> only 9-1-1

> provider that is using MPDS in our county. Sal works

> in this county

> also. By using MPDS sal thinks the are 'hiding

> traffic' from everyone

> that is scanning our frequencies.

>

> Danny

>

> >

> > > The National Academy of EMD is affiliated with

> Dr.

> > > Clawson and his *proprietary* method of

> Emergency

> > > Medical Dispatching, correct?

> > >

> > > Would that be like Zoll, , or

> PhysioControl

> > > saying that defibrillation only works when you

> use

> > > their device? Or perhaps like a college or

> training

> > > program saying that EMS only works when the EMTs

> and

> > > paramedics are graduates of their school?

> > >

> > > In my opinion, there's too many proprietary

> > > solutions out there for EMS. EMD/MPDS and the

> > > various other " card " courses all fall into that

> > > category. Some marketing guru finds a niche,

> then

> > > starts claiming their product/system is the

> > > " standard of care, " and lo and behold, the

> lemmings

> > > of EMS follow behind.

> > >

> > > We've got to get away from proprietary methods

> and

> > > move towards open-source standards that are

> backed

> > > by research.

> > >

> > > -Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

> > > Austin, Texas

> > >

> > > Re: EMD Dispatching

> > > Controversy?

> > >

> > >

> > > , I just forwarded this email to Carlynn

> Page

> > > of the National Academy Of

> > > EMD, we'll see what the answer is!

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > > removed]

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

Sal,

I don't recall being taught to use the MPDS codes on the radio when I became

an EMD way back in the early 90’s. The codes were used to keep dispatchers from

having to type in the entire description when entering the call into the CAD.

Some services may be using those codes in their radio traffic, but I can’t say

why. As far as I know the use of these codes in radio traffic was not the

intention of the creator, Dr. Clawson.

Tater

salvador capuchino wrote:

okay guys, I guess I mentioned the wrong topic. I am

not accusing any service that uses MPDS of just doing

it to hide calls. But maybe that was one intention of

the creator was to hide the traffic the same way 10

codes do to those not familiar with the system. I do

not think there is any service here in the RGV any

longer that jumps calls. Now the pt usually calls

direct. So anyway, it doesn't matter

Sal

--- " E. Tate " wrote:

> Exactly how does MPDS accomplish this?? Are you

> dispatched using some kind of code? If so, who

> cares?

>

> Does this have something to do with their ability

> (or inability) to " jump " calls?

>

>

> Tater

>

>

>

>

> Danny wrote:

>

> ,

>

> Let me shed some light, I work the largest and the

> only 9-1-1

> provider that is using MPDS in our county. Sal works

> in this county

> also. By using MPDS sal thinks the are 'hiding

> traffic' from everyone

> that is scanning our frequencies.

>

> Danny

>

> >

> > > The National Academy of EMD is affiliated with

> Dr.

> > > Clawson and his *proprietary* method of

> Emergency

> > > Medical Dispatching, correct?

> > >

> > > Would that be like Zoll, , or

> PhysioControl

> > > saying that defibrillation only works when you

> use

> > > their device? Or perhaps like a college or

> training

> > > program saying that EMS only works when the EMTs

> and

> > > paramedics are graduates of their school?

> > >

> > > In my opinion, there's too many proprietary

> > > solutions out there for EMS. EMD/MPDS and the

> > > various other " card " courses all fall into that

> > > category. Some marketing guru finds a niche,

> then

> > > starts claiming their product/system is the

> > > " standard of care, " and lo and behold, the

> lemmings

> > > of EMS follow behind.

> > >

> > > We've got to get away from proprietary methods

> and

> > > move towards open-source standards that are

> backed

> > > by research.

> > >

> > > -Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

> > > Austin, Texas

> > >

> > > Re: EMD Dispatching

> > > Controversy?

> > >

> > >

> > > , I just forwarded this email to Carlynn

> Page

> > > of the National Academy Of

> > > EMD, we'll see what the answer is!

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > > removed]

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

Salvador,

The purpose for " 10-Codes " as well as the purpose for the MPDS " Codes " is

nothing more sinister than an effort to reduce the amount of information

being transmitted on the radio. As far as not having the " super-secret

decoder ring " to decipher the code. Anyone can go the NAED website and

acquire the coding.

When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to continue

the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the crews become

accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain language and

to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

-Thom Seeber

Re: EMD Dispatching

> > > Controversy?

> > >

> > >

> > > , I just forwarded this email to Carlynn

> Page

> > > of the National Academy Of

> > > EMD, we'll see what the answer is!

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > > removed]

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

Salvador,

The purpose for " 10-Codes " as well as the purpose for the MPDS " Codes " is

nothing more sinister than an effort to reduce the amount of information

being transmitted on the radio. As far as not having the " super-secret

decoder ring " to decipher the code. Anyone can go the NAED website and

acquire the coding.

When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to continue

the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the crews become

accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain language and

to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

-Thom Seeber

Re: EMD Dispatching

> > > Controversy?

> > >

> > >

> > > , I just forwarded this email to Carlynn

> Page

> > > of the National Academy Of

> > > EMD, we'll see what the answer is!

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > > removed]

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Why dispatch with just the code numbers? What's the difference between saying

" Category 29 " on the radio versus " Traffic injury? "

-Wes

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Why dispatch with just the code numbers? What's the difference between saying

" Category 29 " on the radio versus " Traffic injury? "

-Wes

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Why dispatch with just the code numbers? What's the difference between saying

" Category 29 " on the radio versus " Traffic injury? "

-Wes

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Rob, I would submit to you that if your medics are having to continuously

look up their drug dosages, that they either rely too much on their pocket

guides, or they have not had enough practice.

As far as the codes being useless, I would only point out that this would be

a matter of opinion. I know of numerous services that utilize MPDS in it's

" pure " form who don't even give it a minutes thought.

As an EMD-Instructor who has had the pleasure of traveling to many states to

teach the program, I have witnessed the initial struggles that are a part of

adapting to any new program. Is the system perfect for everyone...Probably

not, but then again, a lot of us have been around to see all kind of changes

that have occurred in EMS throughout our careers (some good, and some not so

good), and anyone can tell you that people (for the most part) are generally

resistant to change of any kind. Simply because it involves altering " the

way we have always done it " .

What I can tell you is that I have seen MPDS have a positive part in many a

" save " . Would those people have survived without MPDS...I can't say. I would

rather continue to use something that works rather than trash it simply

because I have been unable to find any " scientific proof " of it's benefit.

Instead, I would say this: Take a course, bring up your concerns to the

instructor, challenge them on the process. That's what some of my students

have done in the past. And, a lot of those skeptics became accomplished

EMD's and swear by the cards.

One thing to remember though. In a lot of the cases of bad outcomes from

services who do use the system, the subsequent investigation has shown that

the dispatcher in question deviated from the instructions on the card

because " they know better " . The academy (NAED) will provide you with all

kinds of cases where services who do not use MPDS have been successfully

sued for a lack of pre-arrival instructions, but you will be hard pressed to

uncover a case of a service who properly used the system was ever sued.

-Thom Seeber

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Rob, I would submit to you that if your medics are having to continuously

look up their drug dosages, that they either rely too much on their pocket

guides, or they have not had enough practice.

As far as the codes being useless, I would only point out that this would be

a matter of opinion. I know of numerous services that utilize MPDS in it's

" pure " form who don't even give it a minutes thought.

As an EMD-Instructor who has had the pleasure of traveling to many states to

teach the program, I have witnessed the initial struggles that are a part of

adapting to any new program. Is the system perfect for everyone...Probably

not, but then again, a lot of us have been around to see all kind of changes

that have occurred in EMS throughout our careers (some good, and some not so

good), and anyone can tell you that people (for the most part) are generally

resistant to change of any kind. Simply because it involves altering " the

way we have always done it " .

What I can tell you is that I have seen MPDS have a positive part in many a

" save " . Would those people have survived without MPDS...I can't say. I would

rather continue to use something that works rather than trash it simply

because I have been unable to find any " scientific proof " of it's benefit.

Instead, I would say this: Take a course, bring up your concerns to the

instructor, challenge them on the process. That's what some of my students

have done in the past. And, a lot of those skeptics became accomplished

EMD's and swear by the cards.

One thing to remember though. In a lot of the cases of bad outcomes from

services who do use the system, the subsequent investigation has shown that

the dispatcher in question deviated from the instructions on the card

because " they know better " . The academy (NAED) will provide you with all

kinds of cases where services who do not use MPDS have been successfully

sued for a lack of pre-arrival instructions, but you will be hard pressed to

uncover a case of a service who properly used the system was ever sued.

-Thom Seeber

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Wes,

More information can be conveyed in a faster time span by saying " respond to

a 29-D-1-f " Than by saying " Traffic Injury " .

-Thom Seeber

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Wes,

More information can be conveyed in a faster time span by saying " respond to

a 29-D-1-f " Than by saying " Traffic Injury " .

-Thom Seeber

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Thom -- thank you for your input and your unique insights. The only disclaimer

I'd add is that the National Academy of Emergency Dispatch which supplies the

cases in question is an adjunct to the enterprise that develops and markets

MPDS. Again, biased information. It would be like Zoll selling their own form of

ACLS that only works with Zoll defibrillators.

As I watch this debate unfold, I am again thankful that both my undergraduate

and graduate coursework had mandatory courses in statistics as well as research

design/methodology.

-Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

Austin, Texas

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Thom -- thank you for your input and your unique insights. The only disclaimer

I'd add is that the National Academy of Emergency Dispatch which supplies the

cases in question is an adjunct to the enterprise that develops and markets

MPDS. Again, biased information. It would be like Zoll selling their own form of

ACLS that only works with Zoll defibrillators.

As I watch this debate unfold, I am again thankful that both my undergraduate

and graduate coursework had mandatory courses in statistics as well as research

design/methodology.

-Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

Austin, Texas

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Thom -- thank you for your input and your unique insights. The only disclaimer

I'd add is that the National Academy of Emergency Dispatch which supplies the

cases in question is an adjunct to the enterprise that develops and markets

MPDS. Again, biased information. It would be like Zoll selling their own form of

ACLS that only works with Zoll defibrillators.

As I watch this debate unfold, I am again thankful that both my undergraduate

and graduate coursework had mandatory courses in statistics as well as research

design/methodology.

-Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT-B

Austin, Texas

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

The biggest argument for plain language is interoperability. Ask your local cop

what a 10-10 is versus a Texas DPS trooper's version of 10-10. Big difference.

APCO 10-10 means a fight. DPS 10-10 means negative.

We need to move towards plain language on our primary channels. Lou Molino may

correct me, but if I remember correctly, NIMS requires plain language.

-Wes

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

The biggest argument for plain language is interoperability. Ask your local cop

what a 10-10 is versus a Texas DPS trooper's version of 10-10. Big difference.

APCO 10-10 means a fight. DPS 10-10 means negative.

We need to move towards plain language on our primary channels. Lou Molino may

correct me, but if I remember correctly, NIMS requires plain language.

-Wes

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Do the medics have a " cheat sheet " taped to the dash or are the required to

memorize the plethora of codes?

Tater

Thom Seeber wrote:

Wes,

More information can be conveyed in a faster time span by saying " respond to

a 29-D-1-f " Than by saying " Traffic Injury " .

-Thom Seeber

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Do the medics have a " cheat sheet " taped to the dash or are the required to

memorize the plethora of codes?

Tater

Thom Seeber wrote:

Wes,

More information can be conveyed in a faster time span by saying " respond to

a 29-D-1-f " Than by saying " Traffic Injury " .

-Thom Seeber

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Do the medics have a " cheat sheet " taped to the dash or are the required to

memorize the plethora of codes?

Tater

Thom Seeber wrote:

Wes,

More information can be conveyed in a faster time span by saying " respond to

a 29-D-1-f " Than by saying " Traffic Injury " .

-Thom Seeber

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Wes,

You are correct, NIMS requires the use of plain English.

Tater

ExLngHrn@... wrote:

The biggest argument for plain language is interoperability. Ask your local

cop what a 10-10 is versus a Texas DPS trooper's version of 10-10. Big

difference. APCO 10-10 means a fight. DPS 10-10 means negative.

We need to move towards plain language on our primary channels. Lou Molino may

correct me, but if I remember correctly, NIMS requires plain language.

-Wes

Re: EMD Dispatching Controversy?

" Thom Seeber " <tgseeber@f...> wrote:

>

> When a service first adopts the MPDS, the normal transition is to

continue

> the plain English dispatch along with the MPDS coding until the

crews become

> accustomed to the codes, and then to eventually drop the plain

language and

> to just use the MPDS coding to simplify the dispatching.

And as a result, we end up with a bunch of medics who have memorized a

bunch of pointless " codes " but still have to look up their drug

dosages and other medical information in a pocket guide.

When you force your personnel to adapt to the system -- without any

significant benefit -- you're allowing the tail to wag the dog.

Rob