Shishkabob
Forum Chief
- 8,264
- 32
- 48
So this has been a point of contention between me and my FTO.
He is of the thought process "If they're complaining of chest pain, even if I think it's respiratory in nature, they get a nitro SL just to test it out". I'm of the opposite view... I'm not against trialing NTG if I deem it worthy, but if I think something is "solely" respiratory in nature (IE pleuritic chest pain for a few days after severe coughing fits with a fever, specific point, non-radiating with no nausea, diminished sounds in a field, no cardiac history, no other factors) they probably won't get a nitro from me.
He admits that nitro can stop non-cardiac chest pain just as likely as it is to not do anything for cardiac pain, but still questions my not doing nitro for chest pain "just to check". If he backed it up by saying "I do it for the pain", that'd be one thing, but that's not his reasoning.
Views on nitro for chest pain, even when not convinced it's cardiac in nature?
He is of the thought process "If they're complaining of chest pain, even if I think it's respiratory in nature, they get a nitro SL just to test it out". I'm of the opposite view... I'm not against trialing NTG if I deem it worthy, but if I think something is "solely" respiratory in nature (IE pleuritic chest pain for a few days after severe coughing fits with a fever, specific point, non-radiating with no nausea, diminished sounds in a field, no cardiac history, no other factors) they probably won't get a nitro from me.
He admits that nitro can stop non-cardiac chest pain just as likely as it is to not do anything for cardiac pain, but still questions my not doing nitro for chest pain "just to check". If he backed it up by saying "I do it for the pain", that'd be one thing, but that's not his reasoning.
Views on nitro for chest pain, even when not convinced it's cardiac in nature?