Two EMTs respond to the scene of a syncopal episode.They evaluate a 50-year-old male patient who passed out and cut his upper lip.The EMTs examine the patient and his vital signs are normal.The EMTs talk the patient out of an expensive ambulance ride and suggest he will save money by driving himself to the urgent care clinic for stitches for his lip rather than waiting all night in the emergency department as a nonemergency patient.The patient signs the EMS refusal form.The patient decides to see his own doctor the next morning but dies at his house from sudden cardiac arrest an hour later.Which of the following statements is true?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

In this case, the EMTs had a duty to ensure the safety of the patient, and there was a foreseeable risk of harm due to the patient's syncopal episode. The EMTs also had a duty to inform the patient of the risks of refusing transport to the emergency department. The patient's subsequent death from sudden cardiac arrest may have been caused by the syncopal episode, which is a possible complication that the EMTs should have considered. Therefore, there is proximate causation, and the EMTs may be considered negligent.

Two EMTs Respond to the Scene of a Syncopal Episode