14 CFR § 121.803 Emergency medical equipment:

"For treatment of injuries, medical events, or minor accidents that might occur during flight time each airplane must have the following equipment that meets the specifications and requirements of appendix A of this part

I was interested to see that it's not a huge list. Here, for example, is the full list of drugs (some of which are injectable):

Analgesic, non-narcotic, tablets, 325 mg
Antihistamine tablets, 25 mg
Antihistamine injectable, 50 mg, (single dose ampule or equivalent)
Atropine, 0.5 mg, 5 cc (single dose ampule or equivalent)
Aspirin tablets, 325 mg
Bronchodilator, inhaled (metered dose inhaler or equivalent)
Dextrose, 50%/50 cc injectable, (single dose ampule or equivalent)
Epinephrine 1:1000, 1 cc, injectable, (single dose ampule or equivalent)
Epinephrine 1:10,000, 2 cc, injectable, (single dose ampule or equivalent)
Lidocaine, 5 cc, 20 mg/ml, injectable (single dose ampule or equivalent)
Nitroglycerin tablets, 0.4 mg

Seems to make sense. Looks like for treating potentially fatal allergic reactions & heart complications. Dextrose I guess is for hypoglycemia.

I'm sure the list of meds has been carefully chosen and well-vetted. The goal is to get a passenger on the ground alive, where EMS can take over.

To my mind, the challenge is assessment, determining which medication to use. This is surely far above standard first aid. I suppose if there is a physician or paramedic on board, it gives them tools to work with.

I have just searched on Google and can confirm that your statement is accurate.

https://www.mtshs.com/dextrose-50-injection-single-dose-vial-50-ml.html

Jeanette Isabelle

The kits were initially developed when it became apparent that medical help was available on board, but too often drugs needed were not.

The med kit is based on the experience that the vast majority of flights have someone on board who has some medical experience, nurse, doctor, NP, PA, EMT, paramedic, other first responders, etc. First thing is the announce on the PA seeking such folks. Been on flights when that happens and each time there's more than one and the most appropriate is selected to work the patient. That's who assess the patient and, if needed, will administer drugs and decide if an emergency landing at the nearest city or town is needed. Fallback is the Flight Attendants who are well trained in the most likely issues and when and when not to intervene.

Makes sense! Thanks for the details.

Query: If u r an EMT or Paramedic or even a former EMT/Paramedic or trained in Advanced First Aid by Red Cross, in your home state, and you answer a call for help from the flight attendant, over ur home state or a different state, do u get any immunity from lawsuit or criminal prosecution if say the patient dies or has an allergic reaction, etc.? Is there a Federal Good Samaritan Law or equivalent FAA Rule or Statutory protection? And yes I am a former volunteer EMT who is also an attorney. Honestly, I would be leery of volunteering my help without such protections. This is especially true if it came to administering medications, even with a physician on the ground giving me radioed instructions.

The Good Samaritan Laws should cover everyone, with limitations that might include administering prescription meds (guessing).

I would never give prescription meds or otc meds above what is on the label unless I had a medical license and liability insurance.

Acropolis50 asks a good question.

In the USA, on a commercial aircraft in controlled airspace, are you solely in a federal jurisdiction? And what are the rules regarding liability?

Or, are you subject to the laws of the jurisdiction you happen to be flying over at the time? That would be a legal nightmare.

I'm not an attorney.

Here's what I found: "...the US adopted legislation in 1998 in the form of the Aviation Medical Assistance Act, which includes a Good Samaritan provision. This protects passengers who step forward to offer medical assistance from liability unless they are guilty of gross negligence or wilful misconduct."

If you stay within your scope of practice you should be in good shape with regard to liability.

Chaos: Thanx for the research. I’ll go look-up the statute and read it. Note that some GSLs are more protective than others.

Your last line about staying in ur “ scope of practice” is almost certainly correct. But, what we were discussing is the possible administration of Scheduled drugs, perhaps in radio contact with a physician or paramedic , on the ground, to whom you have described symptoms and observations. That’s the more likely scenario, e.g. a fellow passenger who shows symptoms of stroke, heart attack, overdose, anaphylaxis? That’s what those medical supplies are for.

I think Doug Ritter made it clear that these medications were intended for use by qualified medical practitioners who were actually on the flight. They have the knowledge but need the tools to intervene.

My thoughts, if it is considered federal jurisdiction, all federal facilities that I know of ( Indian health services, veterans hospitals, prisons) accept any state license). From there, exigence circumstances would apply. My guess only.