ATLS - dinosaur or International standard?

[MARK FORREST]

Dear List,
I have been watching this thread with considerable interest. Many moons ago,I thoroughly enjoyed my ATLS course and I still feel that it offers a good introduction to trauma care. However the course moves very slowly, largely because of it's size and places remain limited in the UK. Our alternative course has been mentioned several times in the thread, so I felt that it was time to post.
 
ATACC was established in 1998 in the UK  by a group of frustrated ATLS instructors. ATACC aims to offer a quality ALTERNATIVE to ATLS. The 'backbone' of the course follows the tried and tested methods and style of ATLS. However, the size of the course and the dedication of the Faculty allow updates on a far more regular basis. For example, any fundamental new research published today, would definitely be included in the next course. Such rapid change is impossible for ATLS, which often continues to teach incorrect, historical methods. 
 
ATACC is also less surgically biased and geared up for the European trauma system. In addition, Ken's point of the trauma language for EMS talking to surgery is taken a step further as the three day course includes pre-hospital care and follows a philsophy of  'roadside to critical care' as continuum, rather than interrupted steps. 
 
ATACC is less didatic than ATLS, offering up to date theories and concepts with the most current advice. This may not suit everyone, especially the less experienced who may need a good basic introduction to trauma care, which ATLS undoubtedly offers.
 
What is interesting is that virtually every academic modification to ATLS mentioned on this list, has been in ATACC for several years.....small is beautiful!
 
What is sad, is that if ATLS had changed more rapidly and had listened more closely to those outside surgery and America, then courses such as ours would have been unecessary or very different eg entirely pre-hospital.
 
I will now retire to the ATACC bunker and close the lid, preparing for the ATLS on-slaught!
 
Regards
Mark F
ATACC Medical Director
UK
www.atacc.co.uk


----- Original Message ----
From: Krin135 at aol.com
To: trauma-list at trauma.org
Sent: Saturday, 14 October, 2006 7:17:56 PM
Subject: Re: Mandatory ATLS / other courses


In a message dated 10/14/2006 1:08:11 PM Central Standard Time,  
alasdairwaite at doctors.org.uk writes:

However,  with limited study leave budgets and restricted time to maintain
external  education, devoting a large percentage of it to only ATLS may leave
you  deficient in other areas. If making it mandatory ensures funding  is
allocated and ring fenced for trauma training, then it could be a very  good
idea. However, unless you have unlimited (or ring fenced  additional)
resources, you would have to ensure that the ATLS was the best  and value for
money. You would need to prove it was better than other  courses e.g ATACC (I
have not done ATACC so cannot comment on it apart from  holding it up as an
example of a well regarded  alternative).



Another question would be, if the skills learned in ATLS are retained for  
'at least 6 years' (per the information in Chapter 1 of the book, and there have 
not been significant updates in the material for over 8 years, why are we  
required to recertify every 4 years?

ck
Charles S. Krin DO FAAFP
--
trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG
To change your settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://www.trauma.org/traumalist.html