At what point to contact the A&E?

Soubrette

The problem is that people who know the system see it as subsidised (free one way and no parking fees) transportation into hospital, you'd be amazed at the amount of people who needed to go into A&E where I worked but only ever had enough money to get home, never to get there and so needed an ambulance.

Budgets are being pared down - do you want to be responsible for your own transportation or do you want even less medical staff. These are the kind of choices that are having to be made.

murrayfan_2

It can be tricky to know sometimes. I'm an Epileptic and the standard advice is, if a seizure goes on for more than 5 minutes, call an ambulance. It would be my husband who'd have to call the ambulance if this happened so I've passed on the info but told him, in reality, to leave it at least 10 minutes, and then only call if my breathing is laboured/I'm turning blue. I just wouldn't want to use valuable resources, hang around in hospital, and then have to pay for a taxi home to be honest. But then on the other hand I could die if he left it too long before calling.

podperson

Two hours isn't actually that long to wait really. I've been waiting at A&E for nearly 7 hours when I thought I'd broken my foot (after hobbling there on the bus)and my OH has waited 4-5 hours before now when he's had bad asthma attacks.
It would actually never occur to me to expect an ambulance home - with the cutbacks to services already is that really what you think their money should be getting spent on, taxiing people all over? I'm sure you'd be waiting a lot longer than 2 hours if they were having to pay to send everyone home again after being seen.

oopsadaisydoddle

Oh my! I cannot believe OP has even asked this question! An ambulance HOME?!! I can just see it, dial 999 for NHS taxis!

I cannot also understand that people don't have an emergency fund for unforseen situations. I know some people are on the breadline but if they stopped (or even just cut down) smoking, maybe they could save some money to tuck away for such eventualities.

lostinrates

Three and a half miles and eleven quid.

Imagine being rural, OP, and living an hour or so by car from your nearest a and e. that was me last year. And it was right. I was lucky enough to have someone coming to get me, so I bought a bottle of water from the cafe and waited in the hospital for an hour and a half. Otherwise I would have had to get a taxi for the hospital to the train station, then a train, then a taxi home.

It makes your complaint over what is walking distance in under an hour, even if not very nice if you do not feel well, seem very easy. Most of us manage it somehow.

lostinrates

oopsadaisydoddle wrote: »

Oh my! I cannot believe OP has even asked this question! An ambulance HOME?!! I can just see it, dial 999 for NHS taxis!

I cannot also understand that people don't have an emergency fund for unforseen situations. I know some people are on the breadline but if they stopped (or even just cut down) smoking, maybe they could save some money to tuck away for such eventualities.

There are some transport schemes for some clinics it's worth pointing out. But emergencies they get you in an ambulance and you find a way to get home. It's much harder for people with no family or close friends.

lostinrates

pmduk wrote: »

You presume wrong, if a patient insists on being taken to hospital, ambulance crews, unfortunately have no right to refuse to take them.

Patients insisting on misusing facilities should be charged the full cost of them.

I am not sure about this.

Last year when I called 999 it was because I had suffered a sudden loss of sight, Obviously it would not have been responsible (or legal) to drive not being able to see /see well, but the emergency service was very reluctant to send an ambulance.

They asked if a neighbour could bring me (it was the very early hours of the morning in a farming community, its just not realistic to ask a neighbour to take me when they won't get back in time for milking) and if I could get a taxi (almost impossible here, and I could not see to hunt for the number for one, and it would have been a long wait, a huge amount of money and crucially I had suffered a sudden loss of sight and was very scared about what might be happening and felt I needed medical assistance. It felt very precarious and took a lot of polite insistence to get help.

oopsadaisydoddle

lostinrates wrote: »

There are some transport schemes for some clinics it's worth pointing out. But emergencies they get you in an ambulance and you find a way to get home. It's much harder for people with no family or close friends.

Yes I thought this was the case and rightly so!

I also appreciate there are people who don't have support in which case I think it would be appropriate for the hospital to make sure they would be safe on discharge, not necessarily paying for them though.

OP has a partner though and at least one of them smokes so I just don't understand why they couldn't have an emergency tenner or something somewhere!

I have been skint in my single parented youth and even then, i always had a (small) emergency fund.

duchy

When would I call an ambulance ?

When it's a matter of life and death and no other transportation is quickly available -for example both my Dad and my aunt suffered massive heart attacks and died some hours later in hospital .

When not to call one ? My autistic son put his arm through a window and was cut badly enough his arm looked like a cut of sirloin> I had no car, no money for a cab and knew if he saw the injury (I had thrown a towel over it so he couldn't) he'd freak out and possibly damage himself further. I got a neighbour to take us to A&E. She also insisted I call her when we were finished so she couldcome and get us.

Most people have neighbours and friends who will help if asked.

I had an incident late at night where after a long flight I was getting pains in my legs and was concerned it might be a thrombosis. I didn't call an ambulance -I called NHS direct -who called one for me......but the ambulance service then called me and triaged me by phone as I was reluctent to go unless it was essential as it meant getting my young son out of bed and dragging him with me. They kept me on the phone for several hours but agreed I didn't need the ambulance so long as I sought medical attention the next morning.

Three different sets of circumstances-three different solutions - seems like commonsense really.

j.e.j.

pmduk wrote: »

You presume wrong, if a patient insists on being taken to hospital, ambulance crews, unfortunately have no right to refuse to take them.

Patients insisting on misusing facilities should be charged the full cost of them.

That's interesting I thought it was up to the 999 call-handler to decide whether or not to send an ambulance out?

I remember years ago my mum going to hospital in an ambulance when she was giving birth to my sister, but these days I don't think they send an ambulance out, you're expected to get yourself there (in labour!).