fireflymedic Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 It depends on what capacity I am functioning in. If it is 911, then roughly 10,000 at any given time. If I am functioning CCT, around 50,000. Just depends on the day and where I am placed. Gotta love rural medicine ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capman Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 Our service covers roughly 28,000 residents. It's a pretty large rural coverage area. we have 4 bases of operation and five crews of at least 1 paramedic and either an intermediate or basic. Responsibility breaks down like this I guess... It can vary since everybody rotates through the multiple bases and some coverage areas are larger for some of the bases than others. If you divided the amount by five crews however, it would be 5,600 per medic. As crews become busy at one base, the other bases are now responsible for those coverage areas as well until those crews free up again. It isn't uncommon for one crew to be responsible for the entire 28,000 residents until all of the rigs/crews get back in service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard B the EMT Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 As I have stated before, I work in New York City, a city of roughly 8 million souls (and as may heels...LOL), with about another 2 million transients during any given 24 hour period. Take a lesson from something I mentioned in the "funniest thing heard on radio/scanner" string: Boro Dispatcher: "Unit XXXX, handle the call at ********". Unit: "Dispatch, that call is outside our PAR (Primary Area of Responsibility)". Dispatch Supervisor: "Unit XXXX, if you look down at that patch on your sleeve, it says 'City of New York'. THAT is your PAR!. Are you 10-63 (on the way to the call), or 10-62 (off service) to explain that to a Boro Chief? Unit: "Uhhh, we're 10-63!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mateo_1387 Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 If divided up, each ambulance in our county (if all of them were centrally located) would be have 12,650 people in their area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 ONE...............ME I am NOT responsible for what other may or may not do I am only responsible for MY actions What my partner does is his responsibility, however i can also be accountable for the things that he may do in the role of the attending team. HOWEVER it is ME that is responsible for ME stay safe Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEorP Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 ONE...............ME I am NOT responsible for what other may or may not do I am only responsible for MY actions What my partner does is his responsibility, however i can also be accountable for the things that he may do in the role of the attending team. HOWEVER it is ME that is responsible for ME stay safe Craig :roll: Thank you to those who actually answered the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobey Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 ONE...............ME I am NOT responsible for what other may or may not do I am only responsible for MY actions What my partner does is his responsibility, however i can also be accountable for the things that he may do in the role of the attending team. HOWEVER it is ME that is responsible for ME Craig Ya, thanks for comin out :roll: I cover a town with a pop of about 4000, plus the farms in our area, 1500, and in summer we have many a tourist. Probably 7000-7500 daily. Not that many in comparison, but we only staff 2 units full time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EMS49393 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 EMS49393, thanks for posting but you didn't even answer the question. Everyone else in the thread seems to have understood the meaning of "responsible for" in this context. Yes, I did answer your question. Read my explanation a little better. I gave you the number I am responsible for. I also gave you the number of people in my service area. I apologize that I left out how many paramedics we have working at any given time. That would be roughly 12, give or take a transfer dedicated BLS truck. I just don't agree with being "responsible" for XXX,XXX number of people, because I'm not. I have just a few people at any given time to watch over. As I said, one call at a time. There is nothing I can do about the other XXX,XXX number of people in my service area when I am already dedicated to a patient. With that being said, I don't even worry about those other people, especially when I am already charged with my own patient. Not only that, but I often get the left-over EMT's that no one wants and I spend more than 75% of my day making sure they don't screw up through out the day. By the way, I take great offense to being told that I fail to understand the definition of an elementary word. As a result, I have taken it upon myself to actually look up the definition of the word. Responsible: adjective, anglo-french 1643. 1 a: liable to be called on to answer b (1): liable to be called to account as the primary cause, motive, or agent <a committee responsible for the job> (2): being the cause or explanation <mechanical defects were responsible for the accident> c: liable to legal review or in case of fault to penalties 2 a: able to answer for one's conduct and obligations : trustworthy b: able to choose for oneself between right and wrong 3: marked by or involving responsibility or accountability <responsible financial policies> <a responsible job> 4: politically answerable; especially : required to submit to the electorate if defeated by the legislature —used especially of the British cabinet From Merriam-Webster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Plain Ruff Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Actually I see where the disputing poster is coming from. I know what you were asking - in my case I am responsible for none but when I was working EMS I was responsible for 5000 upwards to 300K depending on how many ambulances we had on the streets at the time. But are we really responsible for that many people. I don't think we are. We can say that we have a patient to EMT or patient to medic ratio of 2500 to One or 25K to one but we are NOT responsible for that many people, no matter what anyone wants to say. I agree with the post that I'm only responsible for one patient. and only one patient at a time. It's great PR for a service to say we have a patient to EMS ratio of whatever but does it really mean anything, honestly, in the long run scheme of things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEorP Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 The word "responsible" is what was used in the news article and that is the reason that I used it. This thread could have been an interesting way to compare different services on this one measurement, but it seems to have gone off course and I have asked that it be locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts