Use of Epipen in podiatry clinics in Australia

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

Today I finally got to doing the CPR etc update I need for registration. The trainer for this session was surprised that we had an Epipen for anaphylaxis management.

The course that is required by the Podiatry Registration Board for registration, while covering first aid for anaphylaxis management it does not cover the training in use of an Epipen.

The Podiatrist Registration Board requirements are:

HLTFA201A does not provide training in the use of the Epipen, despite the requirement for "the management of anaphylaxis" (how are you supposed to manage anaphylaxis?!!!!)

The Board further states:

It turns out that in Victoria

Source. Teachers in these schools are required to do a 2-3 hr course just in the use of the Epipen by the regulations. I do not know the situation in other states. As these regulations covers schools, they do not apply to us, but what about the training requirements before using it?

There was some confusion at the course, with several under the belief or impression that this course required by the Registration Board was supposed to cover the training in the use of the Epipen whereas the trainer was adamant that the course did not.

The trainer was clear that we should not be using them without the training course in their use.

Anyone know the situation re the use of the Epipen and the need for training?

 

Craig

I think you can thank the former Queensland Board for this quirk.

At the time that an expanded list for local anaesthetics was introduced into Qld a few years ago, this Epipen requirement suddenly emerged. Now it has been adopted by the national board, along with a new requirement for automatic defib. The confusion about which course provides this Epipen training is long standing. Let's not get into the actual incidence of true allergic reaction to amide anaesthetics in particular...

Whilst no one would contest that making certain activities surrounding patient safety a mandatory registration requirement, I feel personally the pendulum has swung too far. No other registration board which oversees drug prescribing/administration/dispensing activities has such a major mandatory registration standard in this area (eg medical, dental, nursing). Me thinks those boards believe that their registrants are sufficiently versed in these things through training and usual ongoing CE activities, or the risks outweight the benefits?

At some point in time, it needs to be considered that these annual tasks are onerous, and I would suggest, rather over the top - given medial practitioners and dentists administer a far greater number of drugs each and every day without the requirement to prove annual competence in adverse outcomes.

What it suggests to me, along with the convulted and similarly over-regulated requirements for restricted drug prescribing - is that our Board is just not very comfortable or confident with registrants undertaking these activities based on their university training. Perhaps I am wrong?

What's next? Mandatory annual recertification in orthotic prescribing, or corn excision? Where does it end, and at what price?

Just my 2 cents,

LL

 

As I work in a medical centre, I did my CPR training with the group. I asked the Practice Manager if the CPR course would included the anaphylaxis management with the use of an epipen. Her response was that the GP's did not require this however she would ask the instructor to cover this.

How is it that GP's don't have to complete this when they are much more likely to see this than we are? I put this question to my GP wife....no argument from her.

BTW On completion of this course I was surprised some GP's were unfamiliar with the epipen use. Lets just say one of the doctors nearly had an unnecessary dose of adrenalin (used a live pen). That had the potential to be very worrying or extremely funny!

 

The HLTFA201A course we did with Red Cross did training with the Epipen. Not actually using them but the theory and practice with fake ones.

 

The course I did covered its use, but the trainer was very adamant that that training was not sufficient for us to actually use it. The actually "epipen" course is 2-3 hrs .... buts its not rocket science. We have one in our clinic and I feel as though I am competent to use it if needed.

 

or just view the 3 minute video
http://www.epipen.com/how-to-use-epipen

 

.... so what exactly do we need to 'meet the Standard' and allow us to renew our registration come 2012?? Is the HLTFA201A sufficient?? .... and also the 20 CPD yeah?

 

You will find that most first aid trainers while teaching about anaphylaxis in general don't actually show you how to use an epipen. Part of the reason is that even the training pens are quite expensive. What surprises me more is why you need an expensive epipen (I think they cost about $90 each) when you could have an ampoule of adrenaline (about 50c each) and use a needle and syringe and just draw up and administer the required dose IMI.

Most GP practices wouldn't carry epipens because they are expensive but they would have access to adrenaline in ampoules as suggested above so they don't necessarily need to be trained in the use of an epipen.

 

I recieved this reponse from the Chair of the Registration Board:

Thanks, Jason

 

... RTO being??

 

Registered Training Organisation

 

Considering when I did my CPR re cert last year there was a doctor who worked in an emergency department there doing his too, which I found just ridiculous. Who else besides ambos & emergency department staff would be more practiced in actual CPR!? Are we over regulated or what!
Kara

 

HLTFA201A it is!

Thanks everyone.