I agree wholeheartedly that the term is not
generally a definitive answer to a specific question
regarding medical status.
Again let me stress, I am in total agreement that
"stable" is NOT optimal - and some manner of
standardized terminology is a worthy and important
goal. That much said....
According to the Calif. Assoc. of Hospitals and
Health Systems
(916-443-7401) official listing of conditions,
stable refers to vital signs only.
Yes. CAHHS has some wonderful guidelines, but they are
not legally binding to the rank and file health care
provider.
There are four conditions: Good, Fair, Serious,
Critical (and Deceased).
And in most cases, both pre-hospital and clinical care
providers strive to report same. It is imperative
however, to understand that the patients condition is
whatever the health care provider in charge wishes to
call it. If the Paramedic, Nurse or Physician in
medical control of the patient tells me specifically
the patient is in "grave condition", I *might* try and
ask them to elaborate...for the media's sake.
Often times, they are so busy that they (routinely)
say "I'm telling you that the man is in grave
condition. If your friends in the media don't like
that - tell them to go @$^@$% themselves". I think you
get the picture.
I think that Ron's message is important, and that
everyone should try to standardize their descriptions
where and when possible. There are cases however, that
defy simple description, or where the CAHHS guidelines
are a dis-service to the media and public. In this and
other circumstances, we (in the PRE-Hospital arena)
often feel it best to use the verbatim terminology of
those who have provided primary hands-on care.
That's my $0.02 - thanks for listening!
Stay Safe!
=====
Brian Humphrey
Firefighter/Paramedic
Public Information Officer
Los Angeles Fire Department