In the face of a strong outbreak of multiple infectious diseases this winter, the issue of reopening field hospitals should be based on scientific considerations, not just as a social issue.
In October, a parent in Henan Province shared their experience of living in a mobile hospital on the Internet. They were admitted because they were suffering from mycoplasma pneumonia and believed that the design of the mobile hospital effectively prevented cross-infection. However, the hospital soon contacted the parent and asked him to delete** or change the title of "mobile hospital" to "negative pressure ward", citing concerns about causing public panic.
The scene is full of irony and absurdity: a medical facility that was supposed to respond to a massive outbreak of infectious diseases has become a symbol of public fear.
However, should we really shy away from or be afraid to use the scientific method to ** the increasing number of sick children for fear of causing a sense of "panic" in some people?Obviously, the most critical task is to save patients.
In this context, we should pay more attention to science and facts, rather than paying too much attention to the possible social repercussions. Effective medical interventions, such as mobile hospitals, play an important role in controlling the spread of infectious diseases and reducing cross-infection. The public's awareness and acceptance of such facilities also needs to be gradually improved, so that they can respond more rationally and scientifically in the face of similar epidemics in the future.
The reasons behind the fact that many regions have chosen to restart field hospitals despite the pressure is obvious:
First of all, the mobile hospital is a scientifically proven way to treat patients, which can not only effectively reduce the burden of traditional hospitals, but also provide patients with a better and safer environment.
For those who are disgusted with the cabin hospital, you might as well think about it: when faced with the situation of overcrowding in the hospital, would you prefer to let your child wait in a crowded outpatient clinic, or even have an infusion on the ground, or sit outdoors and wait, or would you prefer your child to lie in a safe and comfortable bed in the cabin hospital, away from the risk of cross-infection?
In practice, many children are infected with only one infectious disease, but due to long waiting times in crowded outpatient clinics, they are likely to suffer from cross-infection with multiple viruses, such as mycoplasma, syncytial virus and influenza.
In addition, the symptoms of infection in the vast majority of children are usually mild manifestations such as fever and cough, and it is rare for the actual development of pneumonia or severe disease requiring further **. This can be seen from the fact that many children who are receiving infusions can still complete their homework while **, and the condition is not as serious as the outside world thinks.
The original design of the mobile hospital is to isolate patients with mild symptoms and avoid cross-infection and secondary infection in the hospital. By arranging most of the infected patients to receive ** and infusion in the cabin, it can effectively avoid the "mixed attack" of various viruses in the hospital, so that they can cope with the current illness with more peace of mind. Such an arrangement is not only scientific and reasonable, but also plays an important role in protecting the safety and health of patients.
At present, the news reports on the mobile hospital on the Internet mainly focus on the news that it has been demolished or converted into other facilities, such as the conversion into a youth hotel, sports venue, exhibition center, etc., but there is little discussion about the purpose and importance of its original construction.
Indeed, the reuse of these mobile hospitals is not only a rational use of national resources, but also an effective saving of public investment. Considering the winter respiratory infectious disease outbreaks that have occurred in Europe and the United States in recent years, this phenomenon may become a new normal. In this context, the value of mobile hospitals as a scientific solution to deal with large-scale epidemics cannot be ignored.
However, in reality, the construction of field hospitals in many areas is currently idle. While they can be reactivated at short notice in response to the current health crisis, the problem is that if action is delayed, they could face a serious challenge of a shortage of healthcare workers. Especially in the field of paediatrics, there is already a shortage of medical staff, and in the event of a large-scale health crisis, the burden on medical staff will be greatly increased.
In the current China** environment, it is indeed challenging and risky to discuss this issue scientifically in a truly scientific way. Due to the negative memories of the past, there has been a tendency in society to think that the field hospital and the coronavirus pandemic are the past that should be completely discarded. In this atmosphere, the very mention of field hospitals and the coronavirus pandemic is likely to be criticized and opposed.
Therefore, in the face of the upcoming epidemic challenges, we need to re-examine the value and necessity of mobile hospitals, and at the same time, we must have the courage to face and overcome the obstacles and discuss this important topic scientifically and rationally. Only in this way can we make better use of the resources we have, respond effectively to possible health crises, and safeguard the health and safety of the public.
**From the Internet, if there is any infringement, contact to delete!