DISPELLING MYTHS

JEMS Jul y 1 989

DISPELLING MYTHS

on Ambulance Accidents by Robert Elling, NREMT-P

In this very re.ii .iccident, four firefighters, two p,uamedics and a physician ride-along were injured when a San Diego fire engine broadsided .in ambulance. Both vehicles were speeding to .1id ,m injured police officer.

The word myth often conjures images of two-headed creatures and goddesses who play with human lives in a supernatural world . But there are also myths in EMS.

These can take the form of rumors or just misconceptions. and although there is no proven truth to the myths. they seem to get passed along from generation to generation and accepted without question.

In the case of the misconceptions that surround ambulance accidents, allowing these myths to be propagated can ulti-mately impact our ability to save lives.

The funny thing about dispelling myths is that it usually just requires using a little common sense. The sad fact is that most people only pay close attention to issues when they have a personal interest in them. For instance, knowing that there are a large number of ambulance fires each year in this country would probably not impress you unless you had the unfortunate experience of watching a $75,000 vehicle roast.

All it takes is for someone to tune into the problem, collect data and inform others of the magnitude of the problem.

Don't learn by experiencing the trauma of an ambulance accident. Rather, become aware of the variables involved. such as road conditions and visibility. This will help identify high-risk behaviors that contribute to these accidents.

Assuming your ambulances are ade-quately maintained, the way to decrease the number of accidents is to minimize the number of human errors that occur. This goal can be attained by changing the be-havior of the ambulance driver. using stra-tegies that include: providing education for both the ambulance operator and the public by emphasizing risk factors; conducting driver behavior-modification classes; mod-ifying existing laws, rules and regulations; developing agency standard operating pro-cedures; and increasing the visibility and audibility of ambulances.

The following is a series of myths held by some people about ambulance acci-dents and specific data that corrects the misconceptions.

The data presented represents the -18-month period from Jan. 1, 1984, through Dec. 31, 1987. During that time, the number of ambulance accidents reported to the police in New York State increased by 28.6 percent. In the period studied. 1,~U ambu-lance accidents occurred. resulting in six ia tali tes. Injuries were sustained by 1.894 ambulance occupants .

Each of the charts presented in this article represents aggregate data from four annual reports produced by the NYS Department of Motor Vehicles' accident database.

A specific run was performed using the database to isolate ambulance accidents from those involving other types of vehicles.

The specific categories of information that appear in the charts were taken verbatim from the OMV reports. For sim-plicity, the percentages were rounded up to the nearest whole number. Those totals that do not equal the total injuries or acci-dents cited earlier are a result of incomplete information having been entered into the database.

None of these figures include "non-reportable" accidents with minor vehicle damage estimated to be under $600 or with-out personal injury.

MYTH 1/1: Ambulance accidents occur in bad weather with poor visibility. FACT 1/1: The majority of ambulance accidents occur on clear days with good visibility.

The data: W.•thtt Conditions Clear Cloudy .. Rain .. . . Snow . Sleet/Hail/

Numbtt of Percent• Accidents •ges

.. . . . . 792 . . . . ... .. 56 .220 . . .. 16

. .259 . . .. 18 . . . . .. 51 . 4

Freezing Rain . ..... 13 .. . .. 1 . . . . 1

.o Fog/ Smog/ Smoke . .. .. 1 . Other . . . . .. . . 5 . Unspecified .. . .... . . . 71 . . . . . . . 5

While it is obvious that the weather on most days was either clear or cloudy, the data does show that only a small percent-age of accidents occurs in inclement weather. This may be attributable, in part, to the extra effort drivers make to reduce their speed and adjust their driving habits during poor weather.

MYTH 112: Most ambulance accidents occur on dark roads or at dusk when the driver has difficulty seeing other vehicles. FACT /12: The majority of ambulance accidents occurs in daylight .

The data:

Ught Numbor of Pm:mt• Cooditioos Accidents •I'S Daylight . ... . 825 . . .. . .. .. 70 Dawn ... . . . . . ...... 17 . ... . . .. . _ 2

Dusk - . - .35 . 3 Dark (lighted road) 261 . 22 Dark (unlighted road) 22 . 2 Unspecified . .... . .. .. U . 1

Surprisingly, 92 percent of these acci-dents occurred in either daylight or on a lighted road at night. The more widely traveled roads in New York are lighted. and the majority of ambulance calls in a typical community occurs during daytime hours. Yet the number of accidents remains low in conditions of poor visibility.

MYTH i/3: Most ambulance accidents occur when trying to pass a vehicle that refuses to yield to the right of the road. FACT IJJ: The majority of ambulance accidents occurs when making turns or when broadsided at an intersection.

The data: Manntt of Collision for Two-Vehicle Number of Accidents Atcidmts Rear End . . 231 left and Right Tums 128 Right Angle (Lateral) 447 . Head On . . . .. . . .15 .. Side Swipes/

Overtaking . . ... 224 All Others . . . . . . .. 37 .

Pm:ent• .... .. 21 .u

. .. 41 .1

.21 . .. 3

Although the driver of a vehicle with its windows closed and radio on cannot usually hear the ambulance approaching until it is directly behind the car. the largest percentage of collisions occurs in an intersection, not when overtaking an automobile. In addition, the percentage of head-on collisions is actually very small, which refutes the myth that passing on the left or entering into oncoming traffic is the foremost hazard in ambulance driving.

MYTH j,t: Most ambulance acciden ts occur on wet or snowy roads. FACT i/4: The majority of ambulance accidents occurs on dry roads.

The data: Ro.dw•y Surface •t r--o1 Accident Dry Wet Muddy

Nwnbtt of Accidents

. . . .. 891 . .352 .. 4 . .

Pacent• .... .63 .25 . 0

The word myth often conjures images of two-headed creatures and goddesses who play with human lives in a supernatural world. But there are also myths in E,\,lS.

These can take the form of rumors or just misconceptions, and although there is no proven truth to the myths, they seem to get passed along from generation to generation and accepted without question.

In the case of the misconceptions that surround ambulance accidents, allowing these myths to be propagated can ulti-mately impact our ability to save lives.

The funny thing about dispelling myths is that it usually just requires using a little common sense. The sad fact is that most people only pay close attention to issues when they have a personal interest in them. For instance, knowing that there are a large number of ambulance fires each year in this country would probably not impress you unless you had the unfortunate experience of watching a $75,000 vehicle roast.

All it takes is for someone to tune into the problem, collect data and inform others of the magnitude of the problem.

Don't learn by experiencing the trauma of an ambulance accident. Rather, become aware of the variables involved, such as road conditions and visibility. This will help identify high-risk behaviors that contribute to these accidents.

Assuming your ambulances are ade-quately maintained, the way to decrease the number of accidents is to minimize the number of human errors that occur. This goal can be attained by changing the be-havior of the ambulance driver. using stra-tegies that include: providing education for both the ambulance operator and the public by emphasizing risk factors; conducting driver behavior-modification classes: mod-ifying existing laws, rules and regulations; developing agency standard operating pro-cedures; and increasing the visibility and audibility of ambulances.

The following is a series of myths held by some people about ambulance acci-dents and specific data that corrects the misconceptions.

The data presented represents the -13-month period from Jan . l, 1984, through Dec. 31, 1987. During that time, the number of ambulance accidonts reported to the polico in New York State increased by 28.6 percont . In the period studied, U U ambu-\anc~ accid~nts occurred, resulting in six ratali tes . !,,Juries were ,u,tained by 1,894 ambulance occupants.

Each of the charts presonted in thi, article reprnents aggregate data from four onnual repo rts produced by the NYS Dopartment o f Motor Vehicle,· accidont database.

A specific run was performed using the database to isolate ambulance accidents from those involving other types of vehicles.

The sp~ic categories of information that appear in the charts were taken verbatim from the OMV reports. For sim-plicity, the percentages were rounded up to the nearest whole number. Those totals that do not equal the total injuries or acci-dents cited earlier are a result of incomplete information having been entered into the database.

None of these figures include "non-reportable" accidents with minor vehicle damage estimated to be under $600 or with-out personal injury.

MYTH #1: Ambulance accidents occur in bad weather with poor visibility. FACT #1: The majority of ambulance accidents occur on dear days with good visibility.

The data:

W .. ther Number of Percent• Conditions Acridenb ,ge Clear . . , . . 792 . , .56 Cloudy . . 220 . . ...... 16 Rain ..... . .. . .. .. . . 259 . ........ 18 Snow .. . .. . 51 ,4 Sleet/Hail/

Freezing Rain .... .. 13 . . . .... l Fog/ Smog/ Smoke .. . .. 1 . ...... . .. 1 Other .. 5 . . . .. . 0 Unspecified .. ... .... . 71 , . .. . . .. . . 5

While it is obvious that the weather on most days was either clear or cloudy, the data does show that only a small percent-age of accidents occurs in inclement weather, This may be attributable, in part, to the extra effort drivers make to reduce their speed and adjust their driving habits during poor weather.

MYTH jl: Most ambulance accidents occur on dark roads or at dusk when the drivtr has difficulty seeing other vehicles . FACT N2: The majority of ambulance accidents occurs in daylight .

The data: Ugh! Number of Percmt-Condilioas Accidtnb '"' Daylight .. . 825 . .. ... 70 Dawn .. 17 . .. ... 2

Dusk . . .35 . . ... 3 Dark (lighted road) 261 . .... . .. . 22 Dark ( unlighted road) 22 .... ...... 2 Unspecified . . . . .. 12 . . . .. 1

Surprisingly, 92 percent of these acci-dents occurred in either daylight or on a lighted road at night. The more widely traveled roads in New York are lighted, and the majority of ambulance calls in a typical community occurs during daytime hours, Yet the number of accidents remains low in conditions of poor visibility.

MYTH HJ: Most ambulance accidents occur when trying to pass a vehicle that refuses to yield to the right of the road. FACT HJ: The majority of ambulance accidents occurs when making turns or when broadsided at an intersection.

The data:

Mmnorof Collision for Two-Vrhiclo A«idenb

Number of Acridtnb

Rear End , .. . .. 231 .. Left and Right Turns 128 . Right Angle (Lateral) 447 . Head On . .. .. 15. Side Swipes/

Overtaking .. . ... . 224 . , All Others .. .. .... .. . 37.

Percent·

'"' . . 21 .12

. . . 41

. ' .. 1

.. 21 .3

Although the driver of a vehicle with its windows dosed and radio on cannot usually hear the ambulance approaching until it is directly behind the car, the largest percentage of collisions occurs in an intersection, not when overtaking an automobile. In addition, the percentage of hea_d-on collisions is actually very small. which refutes the myth that passing on the left or entering into oncoming traffic is the foremost hazard in ambulance driving.

MYTH fl: Most ambulance accidents occur on wet or snowy roads. FACT #4: The majority of ambulance accidents occurs on dry roads.

The data:

Roadway Swlaco ,ti1111tof Number of Percent· Accident Acridtnb '"' Dry . .. 891 .. ....... 63 Wet Muddy

. . . . . 352 . . 25 ' ''. ,4 .' .o

. 78 . .... . ... . s Snow: ke Slush . Other Cnspecified

. ..... .. 12 . . .. l .3 . . .. .. . 0

. 74 . .3

Even when ambulance drivers use extra caution on wet roads, a significant number of ambulance accidents occurs. But reduced road grip is also difficult to detect on dry roads. As a result. it is imperative to drive cautiously to compensate for a possible error in judging the road grip you do have. It is generally recommended that drivers reduce normal speed by ont>-fourth for rain. ont>-half for snow and thret>-fourths for icy surfaces.

Drivers should not be lulled into a false sense of security when traveling on dry roads. The statistics show that dry roads do not ensure safety and that drivers must always be alert and cautious.

One useful technique that defensive drivers practice is keeping a four•second following distance on dry pavements when all other conditions are good. To determine this distance, watch the rear bumper of the vehicle just ahead as it passes a stationary marker. such as a tar strip, sign post or telephone pole. and count "one thousand and one. one thousand and two, one thou• sand and three, one thousand and four." As you say "four," your front bumper should reach that marker. If you reach it before that point, reduce your speed by one or two mph and then recheck your dis-tance. When conditions are not good, increase your following distance to six seconds or more. See Figure 1 for driver reaction and vehicle braking distances in a light, two-axle truck.

Figur~ I

Driver Reaction and Vehicle Braking Distances in a Light,

Two-Axle Truck Miles Driver Vehicle Total Per Reaction Braking Stopping

Hour Distance· Distance· Distance•

10 11 7 18 15 17 17 34 20 22 30 52 25 28 46 74 30 33 67 100 35 39 92 131 40 H 125 169 45 so 103 215 so 55 225 280 55 61 275 336 oO 6o 360 426

"All dm.incn giv~n ue ,n fttt .

MYTH i/5: Most ambulance accidents occur while backing the vehicle into a tight spot. FACT i/5: As in Fact i/3. the majority of ambulance accidents occurs on the road· wa}' in an intersection.

The data:

Loatioa of Acddmt

Nwnbuof Accidatb

Pfftfflt•

'"' On Roadway at Intersection ...... 824 . . . 70

On Roadway. Not at Intersection, and Off Roadway 348 .. ....... 30

Intersections clearly present a hazard to the ambulance driver and the crew. The overwhelming number of accidents that occurs at intersections strongly suggests that other drivers do not hear or see an ambulance until it is too late to stop their vehicles. A "rolling stop." or the practice of slowing as you enter an intersection in the hope that you could stop in time if another driver was in your path, is reek• less. It is not possible to stop a moving 11.000-pound (or heavier) vehicle travel-ing more than 35 mph in time to prevent an accident.

Ambulances are considered lightweight trucks. As vehicle weight increases, the vehicle braking distance also increases. Thus, an ambulance will travel much farther than a car when braking. Do you know what your ambulance weighs7 Figure 2 illustrates ambulance types and weights.

Figur~ 2

Ambulance Types and Weights Ambulooc, M.uimum Gross A,mge M,nllhdun,r

Type Vehidel'l,jght Curi>IV,ight Type I Type II Type III

11,000 lb. 9,000 lb.

11.000 lb.

8.630 lb . 7,065 lb . 8,860 lb.

An informal survey of fully equipped Type III ambulances produced an average actual vehicle weight of 10.450 pounds excluding the patient and crew.• Such an average implies that many services are routinely overloading their ambulances. Patient and crew safety is jeopardized, as the handling and braking of the vehicle are affected when the gross vehicle weight is exceeded.

It lS recommended that drivers come to

a complete stop at a stop sign or red light, make eye contact with all other driven and then proceed with caution. ln a case in which the ambulance actually has the sr-light or there is no stop sign, defensive driving would dictate momentarily moving the right foot off the accelerator to cover the brake and slowing the vehicle until clearing the intersection. This will help reduce the reaction time required to move the foot to the brake pedal. should the driver need to stop the vehicle.

While many ambulance accidents do occur when ambulances are backed up without a spotter, these accidents are often minor in nature and frequently are not reported to the police.

MYTH #6: Because ambulances have lights and sirens, the traffic signal device does not present the ambulance driver with a major hazard. FACT #6: Locations where traffic signal-ing devices exist present the greatest risk for an ambulance accident to occur.

The data:

Traffic Control Number of Paant• ,t Accidmt Sites Accidatb ,g,s None . . . . .. 424 . . . 30 Traffic Signal Device 745 . . . . 53 Stop Sign . 94 . . . 7 Flashing Light. . . ...... 8 .... . ... .. 1 Yield Sign ....... , .. . e. .1 Officer/ Guard ....... . 5 . . ... . 0 No Passing Zone ... 18 . . .. . 1 Other . . .... 26 . . .... . ... 2 Unspecified .......... 84 . . . 6

Since 60 percent of the accidents occurred at stop signs or traffic lights. it is obvious that the intersection is a dangerous place.

An emergency vehicle should not attempt to assert the right of way and pass through an intersection against a traffic signaling device. In New York State, sta-tistics show that 70 percent of reported ambulance accidents occurred in intersec-tions and frequently resulted in serious injury or death.

A typical intersection scenario might involve a passenger car traveling at 35 mph approaching an intersection where the driver has a gr.,n light . At this time, the vehicle is 116 f.,t from the intersection. An ambulance traveling 4S mph on an emergency run is nearing a red light, 200 f.,t from the same intersection. The short-est distance betw.,n both vehicles would be 252 f.,t apart .

The light on the emergency vehicle likely

will not attract attention because it is often obscured at intersections. The other alter-native is that the ambulance siren will alert the oncoming automobile driver. But num-erous studies have shown that the sound of an ambulance siren cannot actually project over a long distance or overcome other traffic and ambient sounds. Since the siren is also non-<lirectional, it may bounce off buildings and trees, making it confus-ing for other motorists to pinpoint the vehicle's location.

In a 1986 study by Tom Prewitt, it was found that a typical wail siren mode measured for sound levels at a 45-degree angle to the siren speaker cannot be heard by the automobile driver in the above scenario.1 Thus, the driver can neither see nor hear the ambulance approaching the intersection.

The automobile in this case is beyond the point of no return. Even if the driver were to recognize a siren, it would not be pos• sible for him to stop the vehicle without sliding through the intersection. The ambu-lance is also past that point. At 45 mph, the ambulance, which is a much heavier vehicle and traveling 66 feet per second, will cross into the path of the oncoming car, and the vehicles will collide.

Many ambulance services do not have a standard procedure for the use of lights and sirens. The following recommenda-tions might be helpful in establishing such procedures. but need to be tempered by local vehicle and traffic laws:

Routine Driving (Code //)-Any call other than an emergency run should be considered a Code II or routine response. All Code II runs should be made using headlights only-no sirens, beacons or flashers . During a Code II response, an ambulance should be safely driven and not subject to any emergency vehicle privileges under the state's vehicle and traffic laws.

Emergency Driving (Code ///)-Should be limited to "true emergency" runs that are defined as situations in which there is a high probability of death or serious injury. Implementation of emergency medical dispatcher protocols can help reduce the number of Code lil responses based on pre-determined medical interrogating and response procedures.

Once on the scene, the decision to run Code Ill to the hospital must be based on whether the patient's status is critical or unstable . The patient's status is. of course, • medical judgment call . A patient with a fractured tibia shouldn"t require a Code Ill nde to the hospital, as the ride then poten-tially becomes more dangerous than the onginal injury . All Code Ill runs should be

made using headlights. emergency lights and siren as required by state laws.

The emergency driving ( Code Ill) section of any procedure should include the follow-ing criteria:

• The first arriving certified first re-sponder, EMT or advanced EMT should be responsible for determining the response status for any additional ambulance ve-hicles going to the scene of the call.

• Ambulance service vehicles should not exceed posted speed limits by more than 10 mph.

• Ambulance service vehicles should not exceed posted speed limits when proceeding through intersections with a green light.

• Ambulance service vehicles approach-ing a red light, stop sign or railroad cross-ing must come to a complete stop before proceeding with caution.

• When traffic conditions require ambu-lance service vehicles to travel in the oncoming traffic lanes, the maximum speed should be 20 mph.

• When ambulance service vehicles use the medium ( turning lane) or oncoming traffic lane to approach intersections, they must come to a complete stop before proceeding through the intersection with caution.

Safety Equipment One other element that directly affects

the outcome of ambulance accidents is the safety equipment used in the vehicle. While ambulance personnel are assumed to be ex-tremely safety-<:onscious, that is not always the case.

The safety equipment used by all the 4,876 occupants who were involved in the ambulance accidents studied is listed in Figure 3. The total number of injuries given in this figure is less than those pre-

Figure 3

Safety Equipment Used in Accidents Studied

Minor/ Major Moderate No

Device Injury Injury Injury

No Restraint 62 361 820 Lap Belt 22 357 498 Harness 4 135 209 Lap Belt

and Harness 22 336 500 Child Restraint 1 5 19 Helmet 4 9 0 Unspecified 29 256 1.027 TOTAL H4 1,659 J,073

viously cited due to incomplete accident documentation.

It was expected that the statistics would be more dramatically in favor of restrain-ing devices than they actually show. How-ever, few EMT s wear restraining devices in ambulances for a number of reasons. Further analysis of the data showed that 37 percent of the occupants were injured. Although 58 percent of those injured were wearing an adult restraining device. com-pared with 42 percent who wore no re-straint at all, the most serious injuries occurred in the victims who did not wear restraints . Patients wearing a restraining device had a S percent chance of having a major injury, compared with those who did not wear a restraining device, who had a 10 percent chance of suffering a major injury.

Gov. Mario Cuomo of New York State signed into law the nation's first automobile seat-belt law, which went into effect on Jan. 1, 1985. This law requires all front-seat passengers in motor vehicles to be restrained either in safety seats or safety belts. An exemption to the law was pro-vided for those drivers and passengers with a physically disabling condition that would prevent the use of these safety devices. For the purpose of the law, the term "motor vehicle" specifically excluded those vehicles that are "authorized emergency vehicles," including ambulance vehicles.

The overwhelming evidence in favor of using automobile passenger restraining devices is testimony that all ambulance services should incorporate into their standard operating procedures the follow-ing points:

• All operators and front-seat passengers of ambulance service vehicles must use seat belts when the vehicle is in motion.

• Any patient on a stretcher must be secured at all times when the vehicle is in motion or the stretcher is being moved .

• All EMS personnel in the pa tien t compartment must use seat belts wben not attending to a patient and when the vehicle is in motion.

• All non-Ei\1S personnel in the patient compartment must use seat belts when the vehicle is in motion .

• Whenever possible, if a child is taken along to the hospital and the child's own restraining device is available, he should be placed in the device and belted into the ambulance seat.

• If the child is the patient, he should be appropriately secured onto the stretcher with straps or a child seat .

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that 200children's

lives were saved by child safety seats in 1987.' In addition, proper use oi child restraints could save an additional 500 children"s Uves and prevent between 39.0CO to 108.000 injuries each year.

It is unrealistic to expect the public to use seat belts if those in health-are professions fail to do so. The people of a community will notice when an ambulance drives by without a belted-in crew or a volunteer ~IT drives his personal car while unbelted. Managers have known for years that it is not what you say that counts. Since it is

what you do that people remember. present a good role model for your community.

Fire department persoMel should also be aware that the National Fire Protection Association recommends that "'drivers shall not move fire department vehicles until all persons on the vehicle are seated and se-cured with seat belts or safety harnesses in approved riding positions.'''

Summary There appears to be a self-perpetuating

trail of misinformation surrounding the

Response Letter JEMS October 1989

HIT OR MYTH obert Elling's July article, "Dispelling

Ill Myths on Ambulance Accidents," was excellent and long overdue. His dis-section of the emergency medical vehicle accident (EMVA) data in New York state by outlining six myths of ambulance accidents was compelling. And his very readable commentary on this little studied problem in EMS specifically and public safety in general was also valuable.

The problem of EMVAs hubeen pres-ent since the invention of red lights and sirens. Yet, little data is available regarding this appalling problem. The very mention of these accidents causes most EMS admin-istrators to briskly change the subject.

I have been interested in this problem for some years and would like to offer the theory that emergency responses actually cause many more accidents between pri-vate vehicles than accidents involving ambulances, fire trucks or police cars. We at Medical Priority Consultants call these "emergency vehicle-related accidents" and estimate that this previously unidentified phenomenon represents many times more the number of accidents identified by any official statbtla. Nevertheless, according to my math, the problem b approaching immense proportions on a national and international basis.

I was pleased to see Mr. Elling state that, '1mplementatlon of emergency medical dispatcher protocols can help reduce the number of Code 111 responses based on predetermined medical Interrogating and response procedures." Certainly everyone "responsible" for patient care and responder safety should read and re-read Mr. Elling's article, and then heed his words. l•H /. Cw,011, MD M,dica/ PriorllJI Co,uwl1a11t, Inc. S.lt Lale, CilJI, Ut•~

issue of ambulance accidents. As with all problems. we must first acknowledge that a problem does exist and clearly distinguish the facts from the myths. The intent of this article was to clarify some of those miscon-ceptions by using an analysis of one state's four-year experience with ambulance accidents.

The next step in solving this problem is to create driver education programs that modify the behavior of ambulance drivers, adjust their attitudes about driving an emergency vehicle and make them fully aware of the hazards encountered in driving an ambulance.

In addition. consider adjusting the agency standard operating procedure so that all ambulances must come to a com-plete stop at all stop signs and red lights to minimize the number of accidents that occur in the intersection.

Readers who would like to learn more about this subject should contact their state EJ\IIS -offices to determine if they offer emergency vehicle operator courses or continuing education programs that deal with ambulance driving. New York State has developed a network of 90 instructors who are qualified to teach the Ambulance Accident Prevention Seminar, a nine-hour classroom-based ambulance driver "atti-tude adjustment" program.

Two other organizations that have de-veloped driving courses geared specifically for ambulance driving are: Failsafe Driving Inc. Alvin F. Davenport. president 2529 San Pablo Ave. Pinole, CA 94564

National Academy for Professional Driving

Dick T umer. chairman 1001-A South Interstate ~5 P.O. Box 649 Hutchins, TX 75141 References l . Elling R. Guuin R: Ambul,mc, Acc1d1rnt Pr,u,n-tion S,rninar Studtnt Workbook . NYS Ei."1S r'rogram public,uion. December 1988. 2. Staff Report. "Exploring the inttrffl:tion illusion ... 1'-tlitchonical Engimttring. Febru.ary 1986. J . £\1S Wt1k: Your Timt To Shint Planning Guidt. U.S. Dep•rtment of Transportation. N.iJ.tion,11 High-way TrUfic Siiffy Administration booklet. M.iy 1988. -1 . NFP.-t lSOO Standard on Fir, D,partmtnt Occupa-tional Saf,ry and H,alth Prosram , 1987 Edition.

Robert Elling. NREMT-P, is the associate director for educational services with the New York Stale Department of Health EMS Program. He is co-author of N.Y. State's Ambulance Accident Prevention s.,minar. He is also a paramedic with the Colonie Village Fire Company in Colonie. N.Y.

lives were saved by child safety seats in 1987. ' In addition, proper use of child restraints could save an additional 500 children's lives and prevent between 39,000 to 108,000 injuries each year.

It is unrealistic to expect the public to use seat belts if those in health-care professions fail to do so . The people of a community will notice when an ambulance drives by without a belted-in crew or a volunteer E.\,IT drives his personal car while unbelted. Managers have known for years that it is not what you say that counts. Since it is

what you do that people remember, present a good role model for your community.

Fire department persoMel should also be aware that the National Fire Protection Association recommends that "drivers shall not move fire department vehicles until all persons on the vehicle are seated and se-cured with seat belts or safety harnesses in approved riding positions."•

Summary There appears to be a self-perpetuating

trail of misinformation surrounding the

issue of ambulance accidents. As with all problems, we must first acknowledge that a problem does exist and clearly distinguish the facts from the myths. The intent of this article was to clarify some of those miscon-ceptions by using an analysis of one state's four-year experience with ambulance accidents.

The next step in solving this problem is to create driver education programs that modify the behavior of ambulance drivers, adjust their attitudes about driving an emergency vehicle and make them fully aware of the hazards encountered in driving an ambulance.

In addition, consider adjusting the agency standard operating procedure so that all ambulances must come to a com-plete stop at all stop signs and red lights to minimize the number of accidents that occur in the intersection.

Readers who would like to learn more about this subject should contact their state EMS offices to determine if they offer emergency vehicle operator courses or continuing education programs that deal with ambulance driving. New York State has developed a network of 90 instructors who are qualified to teach the Ambulance Accident Prevention Seminar, a nine-hour classroom-based ambulance driver "atti-tude adjustment" program.

Two other organizations that have de-veloped driving courses geared specifically for ambulance driving are :

Failsafe Driving Inc. Alvin F. Davenport, president 2529 San Pablo Ave. Pinole, CA 94564

National Academy for Professional Driving

Dick T umer, chairman 1001-A South Interstate 45 P.O . Box 649 Hutchins, TX 75141 References 1. Elling R. Guerin R: Ambulanc, Accident Preurn• tion Seminar Stud•nt Workbook . NYS EMS Rrog'ram publication. December 1988. 2. Staff Report , "Exploring the intersection illusion." M,chanical Enginerring. Febnu1ry 1986. 3. EMS WHk: Your Tim, To Shin, Planning Guide. U.S. Department of Transportat ion, National High· way Traffic Su'ety Administration booklet . M•Y 1988. 4_. NFPA 1500 Standt:ard on Fir, D1partm1nt Occupa-tional Saf,ty and H,olth Program , 1987 Edition.

Robert Elling, NREMT-P, is the associate director for educational services with the New York State Department of Health EMS Program. He is co-author of N.Y. State's Ambulance Accident Prevention Seminar. He Is also a paramedic with the Colonie VWage f ire Company in Colonie, N.Y.