Recompression And Medical Ethics

[boulderjohn]

Thanks for that great explanation.

 

[iamrushman]

great topic and good points ...will monitor.

 

[kr2y5]

I don't know how much it is in scope of this thread (mod please feel free to move), but I wonder how much it would be possible, at least in theory, for a chamber to become fully automated, or at least to have the ability to be operated remotely. It seems that the biggest limitation is, that there needs to be an attending physician inside the chamber with the patient. What are the kinds of care that the physician in the chamber can effectively provide? I'm assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that things like CPR or surgery of any kind are out of the question, because the physician could not take the necessary tools with him or her into the chamber. What other life-saving care can a physician in the chamber provide? I'm not implying there isn't any, I ask because I'm not familiar with the chamber treatment, and I come here to become better educated. So, aside from legal, and other non-technical considerations, what are the main reasons why a human must be in the chamber with the patient? Which of these could not be plausibly addressed by throwing today's technology at the problem? Thanks!

 

[The Chairman]

What are the kinds of care that the physician in the chamber can effectively provide?

You mean like CPR? Intubate when needed? Oh hell, the list can go on and on.

 

[kr2y5]

You mean like CPR? Intubate when needed? Oh hell, the list can go on and on.

I'm sure it can, the reason I ask is because I don't know what's on that list. If you know of any other examples, I'd be grateful.

 

[The Chairman]

I'll let the real docs fill that list in. I only fix sick networks.

 

[Duke Dive Medicine]

Depending on the type of chamber, an inside attendant may not be required. Monoplace chambers hold only one person, the patient, and are generally used for less acutely ill patients, though some facilities treat critically ill, intubated patients in them. Multiplace chambers like the one at Duke hold more than one person; patients are accompanied by at least one attendant (not necessarily a physician, often an RN, paramedic or EMT), who will place the oxygen apparatus on the patient and intervene in emergencies.

The standard of care for hyperbaric oxygen therapy in the U.S. is that a physician must be present or immediately available during the treatment, so remote supervision, telemedicine and automated chambers would not meet that.

Best regards,
DDM

 

[kr2y5]

That's just what I was wondering, whether it's primarily for legal reasons, or whether it's actually technically infeasible for some reason. Sounds like it's mostly the former? With respect to forced ventilation, chest compressions etc., I would expect that all the technology to enable this already exists, and that it is cheaper than human labor over the long-term, is that the case? I'm just trying to understand things better, please correct me where needed. Thanks!

 

[The Chairman]

Going into a chamber is a traumatic event. Going in on cruise control would be even more so.

 

[uncfnp]

It is an interesting concept though and standards of care change as medical knowledge and capabilities "advance." Like it or not we now have robotic surgery and virtual medical visits. Why not one day an automated chamber with remote supervision.