MEDICS RUSHING IN BEFORE SCENE SECURE

[Just Plain Ruff]

I remember a apt themed group of commercials that summed this whole discussion up, it was a pizza commercial from a correctly named company that said "What do you want on your tombstone" If medics are rushing into scenes where we really don't have any business rushing into, then you might as well audition for one of those commercials. Tell em "extra Cheese and anchovies"

[Bernhard]

Just wondering: there is a study about trauma victims' better outcome when transported fast opposite to beeing "ALS" treated on scene for extended time (just as we needed a study about this, but well...) AND there is the need to treat patients on the spot of an active shooting scene? Really?

I don't get it. What about simply getting victims out to the staged ambulances? Every police officer with basic first aid training and maybe some additional lectures in how to carry patients can do this pretty good.

We know this same procedure in other hazardous situations: rescue the patients from the hot zone by people who are equipped to survive the given hazards as fast as possible. THEN give them reasonable treatment and transport to appropriate facility. Why change this just when the hot zone is no spilled hazmat but an active shooting scene?

[ERDoc]

Yeah, it seems like these studies are competing. I think the best thing is rapid extrication from the scene to an ambulance is the best option. The police can do this, no need to send EMS in to create more victims. Providing minimal care before being moved would be enough. About the only thing that I can see doing is stopping any significant hemorrhage (ie throw on a tourniquet), anything else can wait until it is in the ambulance and on the move to the hospital.