What is the relationship between poisoning and accidental first aid

Poisoning itself is a type of accidental injury with a high incidence and is one of the core coverage scenarios of accidental first aid. At the same time, the special treatment principles of poisoning first aid also complement the standardized process of accidental first aid. The two are nested and complementary to each other.

I have been working at a grassroots first aid station for nearly 6 years, and I have encountered many situations that separate the two. Last summer, a family of three ate leftover watermelon that had been refrigerated for 3 days, and then suffered from vomiting, diarrhea, and confusion. When the family called 120, they only said, "I have a bad stomach and I don't know if I need to seek emergency treatment." They did not realize that this was food-borne poisoning, which is a typical emergency emergency need. In fact, in our current civil accident first aid alarm data, various types of poisoning (food, drugs, chemicals, carbon monoxide poisoning, etc.) account for 22% to 25%, which is the third most frequent first aid scenario after mechanical trauma and animal bites. It is not an exaggeration to say that it is an important part of accidental first aid.

However, there have always been different opinions on the boundary between the two in the industry. Many first responders working on the front line believe that poisoning first aid should be separated from the regular accident first aid system for special training. After all, its treatment logic is far different from ordinary trauma. For example, if you break your leg, your first reaction is Don't move around to avoid secondary injuries. If you are poisoned by drinking pesticides, you must induce vomiting and detoxification as soon as possible. If you are poisoned by gas, you must first move the person to a ventilated and open place. The priorities of many operations and conventional trauma first aid are reversed. If ordinary people copy the procedures of conventional accident first aid, it will easily delay things. However, many experts in the disease control system feel that there is no need to separate them. After all, poisoning is essentially a category of accidents. Separating them separately will make ordinary people more confused. If an accident happens, they will not know which category they should be classified into and whether to call the emergency call.

Having said that, no matter what the academic circle discusses, the two are inseparable in front-line operations. Last month, I encountered a decoration worker on a police call. He fell off the ladder and broke his arm. He also knocked over the phenolic resin adhesive on hand, and half of his arm was stained with toxic reagents. There is a risk of injury and contact poisoning. After we arrive at the scene, it is impossible to separate "this part belongs to accident first aid and that part belongs to poisoning first aid". We must first quickly wipe away the toxic reagents on the body surface, block the poisoning path, and then perform fracture fixation simultaneously. The two sets of treatment logic are originally used together.

To put it bluntly, if the accident first aid system is compared to a first aid kit for the whole family, the first aid for poisoning is the inconspicuous pack of activated charcoal and sodium bicarbonate tablets inside. It is usually placed together with band-aids, iodophors, and tourniquets. It seems to have nothing to do with trauma treatment, but if you really encounter the situation of eating the wrong thing or coming into contact with toxic chemicals, it will not work without it. For ordinary people, there is no need to worry about the classification boundaries between the two. As long as you remember that whether it was a fall or collision, eating the wrong thing, or smelling something strange, call 120 immediately to explain the specific scene of the incident, and you will be able to get the most targeted guidance, which is much more useful than worrying about classification.