Rank: New forum user 
|
A First Aider has assessed an injury/illness/medical condition at work and has deemed it not necessary for the employee to go to hospital. The employee insists that they want to go to hospital. Does the business have to supply transport for the employee to go to hospital? Would it be Best Practice to provide transport as Duty of Care to employee?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
You don't have to - but, we can presume that the IP is unfit to drive him/herself if he/she requires hospital treatment / surveillance and therefore he/she cannot be expected to get behind the wheel of a car. You can call an ambulance, utilise a colleague, or taxi, or take him "yourself" You may also need to bring that individual back to the workplace - would he / she then be fit to drive home? If this is a genuine scanario, then the delay in expecting a suitable response on the IOSH forum before you make a management decision would not IMHO be deemed good practice
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Thanks Evans38004. We had an employee insist that they be taken to hospital even although a First Aider assessed the situation and deemed it unnecessary for the employee to go to hospital. they continued to insist and a second first aider assessed the employee and agreed with the assessment of the assessment by original First Aider. The employee insisted so we did actually take them to the hospital at the time. I have been asked to clarify if we must provide transport and resource in these situations. I know we have a duty of care to employees when at work and believe it would be Best Practice to take employee to hospital however, senior managers do not believe we should. Employee was deemed fit to continue work, no Hospital Treatment required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Angusmac - would perhaps depend somewhat on the nature of the injury (or ill health) but possibly this is more of an HR matter than one of H&S. Could impact on how employees view their management.
Conversely this might be an employee recognised by others as being generally difficult (most organisations have at least one such person) and so perhaps other employees will simply conclude that the assessment was appropriate and that if the employee wanted to go to hospital they could make their own arrangements.
|
 1 user thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I don't see how it can possibly be best practice to take employees to hospital who have been assessed as not needing to do so. For one thing it is an abuse of NHS resources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Then again a First Aider is not qualified medical personnel - only the staff at the hospital should be making treatment decisions (and occassionally they appear in the press for having made poor decisions). My view is that if you take them to hospital there is a duty to return them to work. If they make their own way then they find their own way back to work or home. What do you do when the FA recommends hospital? That should be your starting point.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Then again a First Aider is not qualified medical personnel - only the staff at the hospital should be making treatment decisions (and occassionally they appear in the press for having made poor decisions). My view is that if you take them to hospital there is a duty to return them to work. If they make their own way then they find their own way back to work or home. What do you do when the FA recommends hospital? That should be your starting point.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
If the FA deems that treatment is required urgently, an Ambulance would be called. If deemed as requires Medical Treatment but not life threatening - No Ambulance and we would provide transport and driver to take to local Walk-In Centre/Minor Injuries Unit and return them to work or home afterwards. I totally agree that a First Aider is not Medically Trained and is therefore not capable or Responsible for making a judgement on Medical Conditions and Medical Treatment however they are trained to assess for First Aid Treatment and to provide such treatment.
I also agree that Medical staff can and will get it wrong at times. As to the "waste of medical resources", Individuals are entitled to choose where they receive treatment in the UK. We cannot stop someone from attending a Walk-In Centre/Minor Injuries Unit/Hospital A&E/GP/Local Pharmacy for advice and treatment, that is their choice. We can provide transport as part of our Duty of Care to employees. Maybe not Best Practice but certainly better than letting employee make own way there and their condition deteriorates or is agrivated as a result.
Edited by user 15 March 2021 16:36:42(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Accident at work. Metal dropped on little finger.
First aid[er] = Bruised.
Went to hospital anyway.
Hospital = xray = fracture
Hospital 1:FA 0
|
3 users thanked John Murray for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Unless you are using a company vehicle, it is unlikely that you would be insured when taking an employee to a hospital (most people of social and commuting covered, but no other business use). In this instance we would use a company vehicle to take the injured person to out local "drop in" centre. Is there any reason you are resistant to taking a person to hospital? As stated, first aiders are not medical experts, and therefore you shuld not be consulting them on whether a person needs further treatment. A first aider is only meant to preserve life and prevent injuries getting worse until the injured person can seek professional help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Originally Posted by: John Murray  Went to hospital anyway.
Hospital = xray = fracture
When I was about 12 we were on holiday at what would now be called a festival. In some general 'larking about' I fell over and some other people fell on top of me. My arm hurt. We went to on-site first aider who said it was fine. Next day my arm still really hurt. First aider said it was fine (implication I was milking it). Next day my arm still really hurt. First aider said it was fine, but if we really didn't believe them we could go to hospital and get it X-rayed.
Hospital found a clean break, but it had started to heal. But it wasn't straight, so they had to re-break it to set it. I was not happy.
Fast-forward a few decades.
While on holiday my daughter (aged about five) fell over while running down a hill. She seemed OK (though she said it hurt). We brushed her down, she carried on running around. Next day she said it still hurt. We were camping miles from nowhere, but eventually drove miles to drop-in centre. They said (roughly) dunno, but we should get an x-ray. Drove miles and miles to a hospital. They x-rayed and she had a broken collarbone.
If someone really really wants to go to hospital, I would take them.
Edited by user 16 March 2021 11:28:23(UTC)
| Reason: spalling
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: CptBeaky Unless you are using a company vehicle, it is unlikely that you would be insured when taking an employee to a hospital
More important than that,in a previous role delaing with road traffic incidents, it wasn't unusual to have find a good samaritan put an injured person in their car,only to find they ambo decide a neck brace is required and they have to be 'extracted' by the fire bridgade ... thats polite for cutting the door/ roof off.
|
1 user thanked Acorns for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The first aiders job is to, so far as they are capable of, is to stop the patient dying then and there and to stabilise them so that they can get further medical help. If the first aider thinks that the injured person needs to hospital, the employer should facilitate this, but a first aider cannot give a full medical diagnosis of a patient and if the patient wants to go to hospital that should also be facilitated. Imagine the scenario if an injured person was prevented from going to hospital in work hours only for it to be established that the injury was serous and that it had been exacerbated by the delay due to the employer not letting them leave work. Think what a lawyer might make of that?
|
1 user thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
There's a difference between not letting them leave work to get medical advice (which I agree would be out of order), and not driving them to hospital just because they want to go there. Of course you could always call 111 and ask the trained operator whose job it is to answer such questions whether and where they should get medical advice.
|
1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I know we deal in generalities here it is really down to the employee in question. Some will whine and expect you to hold their hand and mop their if they have a paper cut other will insist on returning to work even if their leg is just attached by its tendons. The question is really how far do you indulge your employees?
|
1 user thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.