Question (disaster/emerg.)

letina · Jul 26, 2005

Which one would you send to get medical help first:
1. 70 y.o. man in Glaskov Coma level 13
2. Man with a possible collapsed one lung and exacerbations on the same side
3. Screaming teenager with broken leg (open fracture)
4. 4 y.o. boy pulseless, non-breathing, with dried blood

I'd say answer # 2

1 and 3 are fairly easy to eliminate, leaving 2 and 4.

I'd further eliminate #4 noting that the blood is dried so there's no hope

Ah, just noticed, it's a triage situation :smackingf

So...........I would most likely "send" patient #1 to get medical help, so that he could further assist.

Now there's a good reason to read over the question more than once! Phew!:chuckle

bbcewalters, NP · Jul 26, 2005

Which one would you send to get medical help first:
1. 70 y.o. man in Glaskov Coma level 13
2. Man with a possible collapsed one lung and exacerbations on the same side
3. Screaming teenager with broken leg (open fracture)
4. 4 y.o. boy pulseless, non-breathing, with dried blood

I think I had this same question....I chose #2 because they could help you once fixed. Not sure how much help a 70yo would be.....

Don't know if I got it right, but I did pass my NCLEX....

Bobbi

ckh23, BSN, RN · Jul 26, 2005

I agree with Bobbi. #2 seems more logical to send to get treated first so that he can assist. There is no hope for 4 and a 70yo with a 13 would not be as of much help.

letina · Jul 26, 2005

I chose #2 because they could help you once fixed. Not sure how much help a 70yo would be.....
Bobbi

hmmm....not sure that someone with a chest tube could assist :rolleyes:

Whereas, the 70 year old could be perfectly able if uninjured.

Purlple · Jul 26, 2005

I chose #2. My rationale was that he has a fair chance to be OK after a treatment and airway ahead of broken leg (#3). (I wasn't thinking about any patient helping others.) 70 y.o. may be in shock or has a confusion. As well, perhaps he has some other chronic condition (he is not young...) that make him unappropriate or confused. I think Glaskow coma score 13 means the patient may be just inappropriate which is not that uncommon for 70 but I am not sure in it.

sjt9721, BSN, RN · Jul 26, 2005

The appropriate triage order is 2, 3, 4, 1.

#2 is first due to the airway compromise, not because of who can best help you or help you first.

Is this the exact way the question was worded on the test? Typically these types of questions refer to 'who to treat first' rather than 'who to send to get medical help'.

suzanne4, RN · Jul 26, 2005

Stop and look at the question and read closely what it is asking.

If you are sending a patient for treatment, they are not going to be able to assit. A patient that has a collapsed lung has difficulty breathing, so is not going to be able to assist. I think that you need to forget about that track that you seem to be following. Unfortuntely, you can rule out the little boy, he is already pulseless and non-breathing.

Think now of what you have learned with disaster triage.............

letina · Jul 26, 2005

It's the word "send" which is causing the debate here. Don't know if I'm on the right track, but I'm interpreting 'sending' someone to get medical help as the pt being able to go for help unaccompanied.

What d'ya think? :rolleyes:

Purlple · Jul 26, 2005

The appropriate triage order is 2, 3, 4, 1.
#2 is first due to the airway compromise, not because of who can best help you or help you first.
Is this the exact way the question was worded on the test? Typically these types of questions refer to 'who to treat first' rather than 'who to send to get medical help'.

It was one answer question (not filling in space type). It was worded as "to send" to get medical help. I re-read every question before answering and tried to visualise it. So, all of them were assessed (no pulse, Glascow 13, etc) and it's up to you (or soft of...) which one to send first to get help.

I can't wait to get my results. I had so many priority and delegation that I can't simply check with a text.

Purlple · Jul 26, 2005

It's the word "send" which is causing the debate here. Don't know if I'm on the right track, but I'm interpreting 'sending' someone to get medical help as the pt being able to go for help unaccompanied.
QUOTE]
I didn't think about "unaccompanied". I thought it may be one space in a helicopter...:) - this is only me... may be THEY/(NCLEX people) had another idea for it.

suzanne4, RN · Jul 26, 2005

Sending to be treated means being sent to the hospital, whether it is by helicopter or ambulance, that doesn't make any difference. The walking wounded are going to be the last to be sent, if they are even sent.