Singapore Airlines failure to divert for heart attack passenger.

They guy claims to have had a heart attack, yet he is alive and kicking.

But people have heart attacks all the time and live through them to see another day? :confused:

In Flight Medical Emergencies

I am slightly out of date on the equipment having retired a few years ago but things will have moved on rather than regressed, so here goes:

Most medium/long haul operators have some form of medical support available. A HF phone path or satcom call gives the crew access to specialist medical advice. What is important is that as well as advising on patient care they also have available a database of medical facilities at en-route airfields. It is pointless diverting to an airfield in somewhere-stan where a ground transfer to a medical facility will take a further 3 hours! The assessment tries to establish that the patient is stable an not deteriorating (or unlikely to do so). In which case continuing do destination is probably the best course, particularly if there are a number of suitable options en-route should they suddenly go downhill.

Many airlines now carry remote diagnostic equipment, stick on sensors on the patient and satcom transmission to the medical assistance facility. These clever boxes also allow the medics to speak direct to the cabin crew dealing with the patient. This makes for far more effective decision making and treatment.

“Is there a doctor on board?” The problem with this is that a psychiatrist is a long way away from general training and not too sure of his cardiology. The most common type, General Practitioners, aren’t too hot on emergency medicine either. As a result passenger medics tend to be very conservative and say “get him on the ground”, i.e. off my hands. Regardless of “where” on the ground is, and what facilities are available, the latter because they don’t know. BTW the airline indemnifies volunteer medics, so negligence claims should not be an issue.

The decision to divert with a sick passenger must be made carefully with the primary concern being the passenger’s well being. It is not always the case that their best interests will be served by diverting, in fact in a very high proportion of cases continuing to destination is the best option. The important thing is that the decision making process is highly structured and logical. Airlines go to great lengths to ensure that this is the case.

Understandably many passengers or their companions do not appreciate this under the stress of the emergency and believe that they will always be better off on the ground as soon as possible. This however is not always the case. in fact it rarely is.

exmpa

They guy claims to have had a heart attack, yet he is alive and kicking.
If the situation had warranted it, I have no doubt in my mind the crew would have diverted or returned to the point of departure.

The fact the man is alive proves it was not necessary.
It can also be argued on medical grounds that permanent heart damage is inevitable regardless if treated in minutes or hours later.

I suspect this man is a gold digger and is using his status to get more PR out of it.

I had a random thought the other day, and this seems like the perfect topic to ask about it, Can, and do, passenger aircraft carry defibrillators? I have seen them on air ambulance flights i have handled, but never seen any signage to one on a commercial passenger aircraft. Can the be used in a metal lined, pressurised aircraft? Or are special adaptions needed? I assume airlines make sure they crews are first aid trained to a certain extent.

Last question, do airlines that divert due to medical emergencies ever claim from the passenger effected travel insurance?

cheers in advance

The defribulators on the air Ambulances are not used when the aircraft is airborne.

i do not believe anything more comprehensive than a basic 1st aid kit (excluding oxygen) is carried on a commercial aircraft.

Some 18 months back I was on a Virgin A340 flight from New Delhi to Heathrow. 1 hour into the flight there was a passenger who had a suspected heart attack. The flight was completely full of pax, the pilot had no hesitation in turning back to New Delhi, we dumped fuel and made an emergency medical landing back at New Delhi. Once on the ground the passenger was conveyed to hospital by ambulance. The crew then had a vote amongst themselves and decided to continue the journey back to Heathrow (They were ultimately going to be working more than their offical hours hence the vote). During this flight I observed a different side to humanity, once we decided to go back to Delhi I was amazed to hear passengers complain to the crew that they were going to miss their theatre shows in London or flight connections or even complain that the duty free trolley wasn’t coming around (God’s honest truth here!).
If I was the pilot it was certainly a no brainer decison to me, life is always paramount, just imagine if it was a member of your family and the pilot decide to continue the 9 hour flight, you would then have grounds to complain if they died!
Anyhow hat’s off to Virgin in this particular incident for making the right humanitarian decision. For those who missed their theatre shows and wanted the flight to continue then I hope you sleep easy at night!

I had a random thought the other day, and this seems like the perfect topic to ask about it, Can, and do, passenger aircraft carry defibrillators? I have seen them on air ambulance flights i have handled, but never seen any signage to one on a commercial passenger aircraft. Can the be used in a metal lined, pressurised aircraft? Or are special adaptions needed? I assume airlines make sure they crews are first aid trained to a certain extent.

Last question, do airlines that divert due to medical emergencies ever claim from the passenger effected travel insurance?

cheers in advance

If everything in report hasn’t been mis construed then there was a doctor on board

If everything in the report hasn’t been mis construed then there was supposedly a doctor on board and it must have been a decision to continue, taken with all risks weighed up.

It’s rather unlike Singapore Airlines to stake their customer service reputation if there was a risk of death to the patient.

Sounds like someone or some persons do not like SIA.

As Newforest 😀 says they’ll be wanting an on-board field hospital next on the ‘big beasts’.:rolleyes:

With that number of passengers onboard, shouldn’t there be an onboard hospital? 😀

We won’t be. The Daily Mail has never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
It’s funny that this ‘story’ has not appeared anywhere else, as far as I know. I would have thought that a passenger having a heart attack would result in the flight landing at the nearest suitable place.