Originally Posted by
slats11
The true figure here is almost impossible to know.
There are a lot of groups with vested interests who promote this issue. Not just malpractice lawyers. But all the industry groups trying to get their products into the hospital system. Electronic medical records or computerised dispensing of medications or expensive new devices are all purported to reduce errors and increase safety. Some do. Some make no difference. And some are frankly counter-productive. Suffice to say that few of these products ever fully deliver the promised results. But just understand you need to find a problem before you can sell a solution.
All that notwithstanding, this is a real problem. There are literally hundreds of patient:clinician encounters for a sick patient admitted to hospital for a week or more. This many encounters guarantees there will be some errors and mistakes.
In aviation, we accept that the majority of errors or failures (holes in the cheese) don't cause an incident or accident. An accident often requires multiple holes to line up. In medicine however, you will always be able to find a hole when reviewing a death. Did the hole cause the death? Or was the death inevitable and unrelated to the earlier error. Causality to mere association? Did an error actually cause the death of the patient? Sometimes it is clear cut. But often it is subjective judgement call haven more to do with prejudice and vested interest than fact.
Remember also that the death rate is the same as it has always been. One per person. Doctors don't save lives, they just delay death. Sometimes however, death can't be delayed and becomes inevitable. Planes can be scrapped or be parked in the desert when they are no longer viable. People however have to die.
Consider also how aviation would work under the following circumstances that characterise the public hospital system:
Often operating aircraft 70-80 years old that had been poorly maintained.
Critical equipment is missing or obsolete or broken, but there is no money this year. Its on next years budget, so hopefully then. For now, just do your best.
People turn up unannounced at an airport and demand to fly wherever they want as often as they want. Unlimited air travel on demand is their right as they "paid for it in their taxes." The politicians keep promising free air travel is here to stay. The passenger does not have to put his hand in his own pocket before deciding if he really wants to fly interstate. If he wants to fly, he flies. Today.
If there are no seats on the plane, thats the airlines problem. Sit them in a toilet or stand them in an aisle or put them in the hold. Whatever. Solve it as best as you can, but you can't deny carriage.
If there are no landing slots, or there are no gates available at the terminal, then that is ATC's or the airports problem. Because another 3 planes are on final (just like another 3 ambulances arriving at an over-capacity hospital). So find a solution.
The relatives change their mind at the last minute and decide they can't come to the airport to pickup grandma today but will come tomorrow. So grandma has to stay on the plane another 24 hours. You needed that seat for someone else? Your problem baby.
Many of the passengers tuning up at the airport don't actually know where they want to fly. They just know they want to fly today. You first job is to diagnose where they want to go. And its random. Some days more want to go to Melbourne. Some days more want to go to Cairns. The number of passengers wanting to go to different destinations will bear no relationship to the capacity you actually have on these different routes today. Good luck.
5% of your pilots called in sick this morning because of those sick passengers at the airport the other day. Guess the other 95% of you are going to be a bit busy today.
That is one fantastic analogy Slats! Was laughing out loud on way home from said 'airport' having just had umpteen on final and no slots...
