Published
Twice in the past few months I have had co-workers refuse to take care of patients (a small 14 year old and a good sized 16 year old) because the nurse was not PALS certified. We all have to have ACLS.
"For the purposes of these guidelines [PALS], the term "child" refers to the age group from 1 to 8 years."
If anyone has something more than the above sentence that will back up my claim that PALS doesn't apply I'd love to have more information.
I doubt I will change any co-workers minds, seems like they just don't like taking care of "pediatric" patients and will use any excuse. Why let "facts" get in the way of a good argument!!!!!
Great question, but I think it neglects the more telling one. Why is your manager allowing this as a cop out? Requiring them to get PALS certified within a certain time frame would end this issue once and for all. If your unit is regularly receiving adolescent patients, then your director should schedule a PALS course and make attendance mandatory for those that don't already have it. Is going to be an ongoing issue (I say if because I don't know if you're suddenly receiving these patients for a time limited reason - like remodel of the peds floor? - or if this is a long term issue). Even if time limited she could make it optional but offer incentives. But it it'll be an ongoing issue, then she needs to re-evaluate the policy that only requires your unit to have ACLS.
kp2016
526 Posts
That is absolutely ridiculous and your co-workers need a proverbial kick in the tail. If we were talking about 4-6 year olds then sure but 14-16 year olds in an out patient setting so presumably not exactly critical care, they are just picking and choosing which patients they prefer to care for and that is never acceptable!!
BTW if your unit does routinely does pediatric cases all your staff need to be PALS certified, I guess my real question is why on earth is your manager allowing this nonsense?