To think a 101 year old should not wait on the floor for an ambulance for 2 hours

[ScottishG]

My lovely grandfather, aged 101 had a fall in the early hours of this morning. He has a care alarm which he pressed. My parents, who usually help him out we're away, so a neighbour was contacted by the careline. She went to his house and found him on the floor, cold and a bit confused but otherwise seemingly ok. Careline caller advised that grandfather should be kept still on the floor and neighbour should not attempt to get him up. Careline called for an ambulance. TWO HOURS later paramedics arrived. He was given a thorough check, helped up and settled back into bed. Paramedics are very apologetic about the wait.
I am not in any way complaining about the kind, professional paramedics who helped him.
AIBU though to think a 101 year old on the floor should not be such a low priority that he has to wait for 2 hours?

What is the "golden hour" anyone? Sorry, I've not heard of this.

Time within which optimal treatment for a stroke should be given.

OP, no one will disagree that it’s not great but the reality is that most ambulances are ramped at A&E these days. Lack of A&E resource means they can’t handover. There are lots and lots of issues in regards to bed shortages so A&E can’t hand off, elderly who don’t need to be there, no bed to hold them elsewhere but can’t release them until you find a spot, all takes time. It’s a pretty broken system that’s only going to get worse.

As harsh as it sounds, if the person who found your grandfather communicated that he seemed okay other than having fallen he is slotted in accordingly for priorities. If his condition worsened the person would have no doubt called back and the assessment re his priority may have changed.

Having watched the documentary series where they filmed the ambulance crews and 999 call handlers/dispatchers, I have more understanding of just how much of a juggling act it is. One of the graphics they used on screen was a map with arrows that listed the incident and a timer and the voice over said how many free crews there were and how far away.

Whilst I really knew it wasn’t the case, I always imagined they were sitting in an ambulance station waiting to go out rather like the fire brigade.

most ambulances are ramped at A&E these days

Yes! That was another thing this programme showed. Utter madness.

Ontheroses that’s interesting as when DH was throwing up blood (a lot) the ambulance took him to St Helier in case he needed surgery as obviously Epsom is more like a minor injuries than an actual A&E. He seemed to think it was easy to do that

2 hours is long but it’s the overstretched services. We just can not afford the NHS anymore. Cutbacks etc

@tillytop

For certain conditions eg heart attack, stroke, trauma it is recommended that treatment is started within 60 minutes in order to give the best chance of recovery. This is known as the golden .

2 hours? Fgs, he was warm, safe, with someone and uninjured. 2 hours is really nothing for a minor event. My neighbour waited 3 with a suspected heart attack and died. I waited 5 with a dislocated elbow. 2 hours for someone safe and well is really nothing and 100% the way it should be, priority must be given to people who need help over people who are old.

I broke my ankle on Friday and advised at scene to take a taxi rather than wait for an ambulance.
As I am quite fit and young and had company (50 kids and 3 colleagues 😊) I went by taxi. I was away from home and was in the hospital within 1 and half hrs being seen from the time I fell.
I am glad I was able to free up an ambulance for someone who would have been in greater need.

No he shouldn’t have waited but watch “999 What’s Your Emergency”. It’s an eye opener about how trucks are distributed.

We called 101 recently for our 2 yr old and they insisted we needed an ambulance. We were only calling to ask if we should stay at home or go to our local Walk In. Didn't want to waste the Walk In Centre's time if the symptoms didn't warrant it.

Ambulance took several hours and when the paramedics arrived they suggested we go to the Walk In! It felt like a really inefficient system - we didn't want an ambulance and would have happily just made our way to the Walk In but the 101 person insisted.

Apparently the reason for the long wait was almost every ambulance in the county was queueing outside A&E. We were, quite rightly given my DD's symptoms, bottom of priority the list.

We also rang 101 a few months before that, again for DD. 101 called us an ambulance (again - we weren't asking for an ambulance), half an hour later the ambulance service rang us and said would we mind going to Walk In instead. It's put me off bothering with 101. I used to think it was an efficient way for the NHS to ensure you ended up in the right place, but the people who answer the phone just seem to panic and call an ambulance.

I do think a big problem is the cuts to social care. It means so many older people are stuck in hospital which clogs up the system all the way back to A&E. Not their daily they're stuck, our government are just so shortsighted and make cuts where they reckoon they can get away with it without thinking through the consequences.

soupdragon That series was such an eye-opener. The pressure on ambulance staff is horrendous, and I felt really sorry for the control room staff, too, constantly having to explain to repeat callers why they were still waiting.

But this is what people voted for when they voted for the lot that are committed to cutting public spending. You get what you pay for, and if you want an effective emergency service and adequately staffed A&E, you have to be prepared to pay for it and vote for it.

Arthuritis thanks. OP, hope your grandad is ok. He'll feel better with you being there.

*fault not daily!

Unfortunately the ageing population issue isn’t just that there are loads more elderly frail people, but that we have fetishised ‘independence’ and want everyone to stay in their own homes.

At the same time we are so risk averse that nobody dares help them up if they fall Just In Case. So we send an expensive highly skilled pair of medics in a £100,000 van round to give them a hand to get back to their feet. (There are a few honourable exceptions in areas with low-skill or volunteer falls teams).

Instant response to people who are basically unhurt just isn’t affordable, or even fair. Mental health services and especially child mental health services are in meltdown: are these less important? Cancer treatments are beginning to be rationed: is this less important? I’m afraid we can’t have it all.

Our elderly neighbour fell a lot before he agreed that he wasnt coping at home. Think 2/3 times a week for months on end. His daughter would stay overnight and he'd still fall because he didn't want to disturb her and would try to go to the toilet by himself.

They waited 3.5 hours for an ambulance once.

You can say its not acceptable but he was home and usually unhurt. And its a hell of a strain on the ambulance service having to provide that sort of care.

Nowhere near that age but I collapsed a few years ago and had a similar wait. When the paramedics arrived they were astounded that no ambulance was on the way and let rip at the co-ordinator. It was funny (in a sad kind of way) that then 5 ambulances turned up, one after the other, and proceeded to get themselves stuck in our arrow turning area. There is more to the story but it would be too outing.. the long and short of it is that is was a fraction under 5 hours before I eventually got to hospital after a serious pulmonary embolism that stopped my heart several times.

I'm not sure whether waiting that length of time is any more unacceptable for a 101-year-old than a 91-year-old, to be honest. They prioritise according to need.
But my friend's elderly mother was 6 hours in the floor recently, and then they called back to say they couldn't send anyone until the next day! (Wales)

I’m sorry. It’s tragic but that is how stretched emergency services are. When we were in Wales my toddler dd had a severe allergic reaction, we drove her to the nearest hospital (that wasn’t a&e) they made sure she was stable. Then then said we had to wait for an ambulance to take her to the main a&e....it’s took about 4 hours (obviously at this point it’s wasn't immediately life threatening but she was still very wheezy, awful swelling, bluish on round lips). There are something like 5 ambulances that cover the whole of south/west Wales apparently and I don’t think it’s much better in parts of England either. Basically if you’re remotely stable you go to the bottom of the pile. What else can they do?

Sorry he had to wait but I had a simmilar wait over the weekend for a suspected heart attack. Turned out to be a false alarm hence I am able to be writing this...

My bro had a stroke recently and waited two and a half hours for the ambo.
Time for a bunch of nurses and paramedics to get together and start a private company I reckon.

This country is shagged. No police. No functioning emergency care. Roads massively overcrowded and riddled with potholes. Everything is run shit. No wonder people are stressed to the eyeballs and mainlining coffee all day and half the night.

The frustration comes, I think, when it is not the case that the ambulance is attending a higher priority emergency. The paramedic in ds's case said that, in his opinion, the priority had not been set high enough.

I work in the NHS. This is sadly quite common. No-one in the NHS thinks this is good enough (least of all the paramedics / ambulance dispatchers), but there simply aren't enough ambulances or paramedic crews to meet demands due to budge cuts.

Look at this way, if you are an ambulance dispatcher and you have two ambulances and have 3 calls within a few minutes:

1. 60 year old has had a suspected heart attack and CPR is in process.

2. 21 year old in serious road traffic collision and heavy blood loss and unstable breathing.

3. Elderly man who has had a fall but no evidence of serious injuries and stable.

In this scenario you have to priortise sending your two ambulances to call 1 & call 2. It's not about ageism, and it's certainly not ideal, but the two most seriously ill patients who are at an immediate risk to life would have to be prioritised. Sadly it means caller 3 has to wait until one of the ambulances is free.

We had a baby with suspected Sepsis wait over an for an ambulnace. The parents took the baby on their own in the end.

*over hour

Like others I've watched the programme about the ambulance service. Yes there have been cuts, but the demand has spiralled, and not necessarily because of serious illness or accidents.

Too many people without support trying to survive with chronic conditions and/or poor mental health put pressure on the service. Callouts to people who are drunk or incapacitated through drugs and people ringing for an ambulance for very minor issues have put pressure on the system. Our society, or parts of it, has developed a culture of entitlement. If you have a walk in service in your town or city and you're mobile, go there if you can't get a GP appointment, don't go to A&E or call an ambulance. Headache? Take a couple of painkillers and see how it goes, same with toothache. As an older person, the only time I've been in an ambulance was when our GP called one for DH who has an existing heart condition and was very unwell.

OP, when a frail, older person has had a fall, of course they need to be checked over. I hope your GF is feeling better.

KitKat you described the difficult choices clearly.