How the NHS deal with a spiked patient..
Discussion
Very few people we come across are genuinely spiked, the majority are just drunk but for some reason their tolerance is different that night. Drinking different drink to normal, not having eaten, larger size shots etc.
It is very difficult to detect the kind if drug involved in a general spike as you need to know what you are looking for to do the correct test and very expensive. I'm sure the police could do it if required.
It is very difficult to detect the kind if drug involved in a general spike as you need to know what you are looking for to do the correct test and very expensive. I'm sure the police could do it if required.
It is nigh impossible to get meaningful evidence of spiking ...
plus as Dr Gregory House remarks numerous times 'patients lie'
If someone is brewing a trivial viral infection their alcohol tolerance can be knocked right down.
If someone is spiked with alcohol it is nigh on impossible to prove especially as blood alcohol level interpretation is some what of an art which huge numbers of confounding factors - yes we can tell with accuracy what the numbers are from breath,blood or urine samples but equating those into exactly how much someone has imbibed is much much harder.
If the police are/were so keen to persue it they should have arranged for evidential blood samples, the blood samples taken in hospital while accurate for clinical reasons are not kept in a fully compliant with criminal chain of evidence manner.
The half lives of some of agents claimed to be used in spiking are also very short
It costs hundreds if not thousands of pounds to test for all possible spiking agents and the results would not alter the clinical management of the patient as opiate intoxication can be diagnosed clinically - if it is severe enough to require Naloxone ,and the use of flumazenil in none iatrogenic benzodiazepine overdose is really not a good idea for a number of sound clinical reasons, even if they were available in a timely matter
plus as Dr Gregory House remarks numerous times 'patients lie'
If someone is brewing a trivial viral infection their alcohol tolerance can be knocked right down.
If someone is spiked with alcohol it is nigh on impossible to prove especially as blood alcohol level interpretation is some what of an art which huge numbers of confounding factors - yes we can tell with accuracy what the numbers are from breath,blood or urine samples but equating those into exactly how much someone has imbibed is much much harder.
If the police are/were so keen to persue it they should have arranged for evidential blood samples, the blood samples taken in hospital while accurate for clinical reasons are not kept in a fully compliant with criminal chain of evidence manner.
The half lives of some of agents claimed to be used in spiking are also very short
It costs hundreds if not thousands of pounds to test for all possible spiking agents and the results would not alter the clinical management of the patient as opiate intoxication can be diagnosed clinically - if it is severe enough to require Naloxone ,and the use of flumazenil in none iatrogenic benzodiazepine overdose is really not a good idea for a number of sound clinical reasons, even if they were available in a timely matter
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/64405...
It does tend to be just people drunk, or "spiked" by a double instead of a single etc.
It does tend to be just people drunk, or "spiked" by a double instead of a single etc.
TonyTony said:
So basically the NHS are unwilling to try and help because it costs too much money, so they just sweep it under the carpet.
Gathering evidence is the role of the Police, clinical samples cannot be used for evidential purposes due to chain of evidence issues. Also the samples taken for clinical reasons may not be the 'correct' samples for evidential purposes ( typically there's around a dozen different types of test tube/bottle you could put a blood sample in,all with different (or no) additives for different tests,plus a number of different, incompatible sampling systems in use). If you want to cast aspirstions anywhere over the response it's the Police who not coming running at your beck and call in case this is actually something that could be persued.
CSI is Fiction .
TonyTony said:
If it is an urban legend why does the NHS have its own page about it... http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Drink-spiking/Pages/S...
The numbers of people actually spiked are a small proportion compared to the allegations of spiking, and of the numbers who have been genuinely spiked, those spiked with agents other than additional alcohol is small. There are a large number of possible spiking agents, few if any make a difference in the treatment of the victim, which by and large is supportive care and observation and some even if there is strong suspicion of their use (benzos) would not be reversed because of the potential sequalae of reversal in the presence of other agents (including alcohol).
TonyTony said:
But its the fact that the Police where willing to do something and the hospital would not co-operate, not even say it could be a case of spiking, just straight up "She's just drunk".
Without making this go round in another circle, despite the answers i've given and K77CTR gave 1A. Were the police barred from their Doctor / Nurse taking samples which were handled in accordance with the chain of evidential custody ? alternatively
1b. Did the Police make a formal request to the Hospital for an independent clinician (i.e. someone not involved in the care of the patient )to use police supplied and secured in the chain of evidence equipment to take evidential samples?
2. What do you feel the NHS failed to do ?
3. What interventions do you propose should have been done ?and,
4. What are the clinical or criminal evidentiary reasons for these interventions?
TonyTony said:
All i know from the police side is that they contacted the hospital and they just told them as far as they where concerned it was just a case of being drunk.
I know its basically a 1% chance of getting any kind of prosecution or even close to with anything like this, proving anything is jut near impossible.
What I'm ranting about is the fact that clearly something was wrong and they where just having none of it. Yes they put you on a drip and there really isn't alot more they can do, but the attitude of the paramedic and the staff was just really bad, and these are the people you are depending on to look after you.
you seem to be focusing on the 'attitude' of staff,yet complaining that insufficient was done ? yet you acknowledge that she was assessed,transported, re assessed, treated and had a period of observation. I know its basically a 1% chance of getting any kind of prosecution or even close to with anything like this, proving anything is jut near impossible.
What I'm ranting about is the fact that clearly something was wrong and they where just having none of it. Yes they put you on a drip and there really isn't alot more they can do, but the attitude of the paramedic and the staff was just really bad, and these are the people you are depending on to look after you.
In my last reply I asked what you wanted done and what you wanted from an evidential point of view and what more you wanted from a clinical point of view. I also pointed out that evidence gathering is the responsibility of the police.
TonyTony said:
Well you might just say its not the outcome I wanted to hear from the hospital. But from my side and what i saw in my opinion is the complete opposite, like I also said before the NHS have a symptom page for spiking and all the symptoms where there, yet throughout all their assessments they came to the conclusion it was a matter of being drunk..
This isn't going to go anywhere anyway, you just keep asking me to explain in detail every sentence i write. From the amount of threads you comment on I see you know the ins and outs of everything anyway.
This isn't going to go anywhere anyway, you just keep asking me to explain in detail every sentence i write. From the amount of threads you comment on I see you know the ins and outs of everything anyway.
TonyTony, The reason I'm asking you for more information and explanations,is the same reasons I'd have asked you for more information and your rationales had I been managing your complaint/concern when I worked in the NHS,given that 2 of those roles saw me acting as Shift Leader for parts of an Emergency Department or the whole of an observation unit /Acute Assessment Unit, I'd have been your first port of call at the time.
If the police had been seriously concerned about criminality in this case the initial responding officers would have arranged samples as discussed above. In a dozen or more years I never saw this done for an alleged spiking although I've seen it done for suspected drink/drug drive where there was no realistic chance of getting breath samples due to the condition of the patient.
The treatment for intoxication with alcohol or common drugs of misuse are generally supportive and are driven by the patient's condition, observations and in some cases by routine blood samples but this is electrolytes and arterial blood gasses rather than the presence, absence or level of any substance.
I find it interesting that you need to resort to what could be deemed to be an ad hominem rather than finding out why I asked the questions I asked.
Happened to me actually. I'd had 3 drinks and came home only to pass out in the bathroom, wake up having some sort of panic attack and not being able to see or know where I was.
I didn't know who my wife was, but she phoned an ambulance. They sat with me for an hour or so while I slowly gathered my senses. Really, really good way of dealing with it. Didn't need to take me into hospital. Apparently I'd had about a quarter dose of what they'd usually see in my blood, so lucky really that I didn't finish my last drink. Hope no-one else picked it up though!
I didn't know who my wife was, but she phoned an ambulance. They sat with me for an hour or so while I slowly gathered my senses. Really, really good way of dealing with it. Didn't need to take me into hospital. Apparently I'd had about a quarter dose of what they'd usually see in my blood, so lucky really that I didn't finish my last drink. Hope no-one else picked it up though!
TonyTony said:
Yes a very similar thing happened. Lost sensation in both her legs then very shortly after didn't know who her own daughter was and even went as far as to hit her.
Yeah, my legs and arms went. It reminded me of when I was last seasick, actually. But this time the dry land didn't help.The worrying thing is that they were probably targeting my sister as 4 of us had left our drinks on a side table while dancing, and hers looked the same as mine.
At the risk of going off on a tangent, I wonder why they would try and drug people that are in a group of friends (as in TonyTony and HereBeMonsters experiences) rather than a woman on her own, as it seems unlikely the others in the group would leave the girl alone once the drugs kick in?
Yes, they were great. Quiet night, I think!
Once I gathered enough of my senses to work out what was going on, I kept apologising for wasting their time, and that they should go and help people more in need. "Mate, we wouldn't still be here if there was another call, trust me." he replied. Brilliant.
Once I gathered enough of my senses to work out what was going on, I kept apologising for wasting their time, and that they should go and help people more in need. "Mate, we wouldn't still be here if there was another call, trust me." he replied. Brilliant.
Is there anything you can do, have a word with the manager? Or pay a couple of our nomadic friends to go and give him a kicking? Having the drinks on the bar all the time and you suspect he slipped something in is one thing, ut taking the poured drinks to the card machine and out of sight is not normal behaviour so I guess you are pretty certain it's him.
I can't imagine a barman would do it, it would surely be so easy to detect if the police had done something - given he was the only other person who touched the drinks he would be #1 suspect? Presumably there would be some evidence on his person or where he lives.
Or perhaps that sort of person thinks they would never be caught because of what has been described here!
Or perhaps that sort of person thinks they would never be caught because of what has been described here!
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff