More flexibility needed

The whole idea of ignoring a problem because it only accounts for 12% of deaths is not acceptable. It reminds me of some republicans claiming that our life expectancy in the U.S is lower if we ignore deaths from road-accidents and gun-shot homicides. Although it is extremely difficult to diagnose the pulmonary vein hemorrhage, but that could be as well solved if patients are brought to the hospital and the operation room much faster than now. On the article says that it took them 40 minutes to take the princess to a hospital only 6 Km away. That's ridiculous. That should've been done in minutes. I believe such cases like princess Diana's death shows that the system should be changed. I believe that patients should be taken to the hospital much faster, and the emergency medical doctors there should be trained and cautious about internal bleedings in case of road-side accidents.

How about Dodi Fayed?

wow...she is dead and how come they didn't talk about Dodi Fayed. I think this article is just to make some money and to get some attention. Even though I'm not sure what exactly happened and can't blame or really rely on this article, I think the best way to go about gettin the attention for the artcle was to mention the French health system. So she is dead because the health care system didn't do much , I am hoping this incident have caused a lot of attention to caution the French emergency system if it indeed was slow for example and needed to improve on their poor response to the accident.
All health care system have problems, if the France have problems with their health care especially the emergency sector then they need to work on improving it to help save more lives at the last minute as Princess Diana.

Were they going to write this story if it was any other citizen of France, any common foreigner or not?

HATERS

I don't understand people like this. What is the motive behind investing your life in writing a novel investigating Princess Diana's death? A novel won't bring Diana back, nor change history. This article is filled with "could haves" and "what ifs" and leaves many things to chance and speculation. Us mere humans can't second guess fate or destiny or wills.

Repeatedly the authors state that they aren't doctors, so they aren't looking to improve the french health care system. They are trying to see "IF" Princess Diana could have been saved. If there motive was to bring the french emergency system under scrutiny then praise them, but they aren't. They're just hating.

So, apparently the book has brought up scrutiny over France's emergency system, despite the authors intention. But, then my question becomes, what of all the other people in France that have died due to this emergency system? What if it wasn't Princess Diana? Would they just go on using their faulty system?



Stupid book.

What if...

I have several problems with this article. Overall, it does appear that the "scoop and run" approach is superior in such situations of traumatic injury. Yet the tone of the writing really discredited the argument being made. As was already stated, there are many grammatical errors and the author admits not being a doctor. The author also implies pretty blatantly that the American system is superior, as this is the "gold standard" against which the French approach is being compared and the attitude is clearly US-centric. US doctors are made to seem more authoritative and credible with long descriptions of how highly esteemed they were. (It also reminded me of how US doctors "diagnose" celebrities despite never having treated them.) Diana's case is merely one tragic anecdotal story but where is the statistical evidence? There is not much empirical data used to support the claim that the French emergency response is faulty...maybe it's necessary to read the book? Also, I doubt the author would've spent any time investigating the emergency treatment of an average French citizen. And I wonder how many lives could potentially be saved in US emergency rooms? In sum, while it is surely wise to learn from past mistakes, this article (and probably the book) mainly consists of "what if?" speculations.

2 systems 2 places

While I am devastated to learn that there is a possibility that Princess Diana could have been saved, I still believe there are strengths to each system. This article presents a some what limited perspective on the health trauma system. I am sure that there is research, and background work that lead to the development of this system which would prove why a detailed onsite treatment might prove more beneficial than immediate transport. This article really makes it appear as if the physicians and medical professionals on the scene almost did Diana harm, when instead they were still trying to offer her medical aid. Do I think that maybe they should have transported her sooner, yes I do, but I don't believe that their actions represent negligence in the system.

I believe that the french system would benefit from creating a system that allows for an onsite evaluation, and onsite decision making that can have a person immediately transported, which may have been enough for Diana. As some of my classmates have said maybe some type of combination between the American and the French trauma, and emergency response systems.

Nothing is perfect.

Nobody is perfect. No systems are perfect. Nothing is perfect. We all should observe and learn from others experiences to better our own and our future. After reading this article, I was upset to know that IF this situation had been handled differently, perhaps Princess Diana would have survived. I feel this same anger when I think about what happened to Michael Jackson and his death. Our, US health system has many flaws and as we can read, the French Medical system is no different. If she had received emergency surgery immediately after her accident, she could have been saved! Perhaps, the French need to be educated more in this area of medical care. Therefore, I feel that the French emergency response system is insufficient. I am sure this happens everyday to regular people, but because she was a celebrity/royalty this situation got so much media coverage. Did this situation have to occur to cause people to be aware of this faulty system? What a shame!

The SMUR deficiently has the standard procedures to deal with the car crash subjects, but the article didn’t really mentioned. Even the SAMU ambulance was well equipped, the onsite treatment before taking the patient to hospital for advanced treatment still seemed to be a little bit too long for me. Since the accidence was happened inside France, the SMUR model should be applied to the situation. There was no medical error for the immediate treatment, only different approach. We will never know whether the SMUR change their accident model to more U.S. model could save the victims life, but maybe there should have something be done by combining the strength of the France SMUR and U.S. emergency protocol.

improvements are always needed

The article stated many strong points advocating for a needed change in the French emergency response system, SAMU, and evidence appeared to be well stated and supported. The article’s authority, however, is questionable in my mind, due to a number of obtrusive grammatical errors.

As in all systems, perfection is lacking and improvement is always needed. The French Medical system is no different. From the evidence stated in the article regarding Princess Diana’s death, it seems her life could have been saved if she had received emergency surgery immediately following her accident. The response team followed standard French Medical procedures to stabilize the body before transport thereby arriving at the hospital 101 minutes after the accident. In the case of Diana and cases like hers, the French emergency response system is insufficient. The French system, by no means needs to overhaul their approach; but if they were to adopt an emergency protocol which first assess injuries then administers care in the best of conditions, whether that be roadside stabilization or “scoop and run” procedures, it seems more lives could be saved.

The question was raised in my mind: if it had not been royalty who died in this horrific accident would media journalists have discovered the insufficiencies in French Emergency Response teams? Would investigators have faithfully pursued evidence and built a case if the death was someone of “less political/social status”? I would argue no. [Though this is beside the point I felt it was worth mentioning.]