Introduction: When an individual requires assistance with mobilization, emergency medical services (EMS) may be called. If treatment is not administered and the patient is not transported to hospital, it is referred to as a “Lift Assist” (LA) call. We have previously shown that LA are associated with morbidity and mortality. Subtle pathology may exist in those who require LAs and they may benefit from being transported to the Emergency Department for medical evaluation. Given that the majority of LA calls result in no-transport, there may be a bias towards not upholding the same standards of care as patients who are transported to hospital. Objective: To determine if there is a difference in Ambulance Call Record (ACR) documentation of vitals signs between LA calls and non-LA calls. Methods: All LA calls from a single EMS agency were collected over a one-year period (Jan - Dec 2013). A control group of randomly selected calls of low acuity (Canadian Triage Acuity Scale 3,4,5) from the same time period was collected for comparison. ACRs from these calls were reviewed for missing vital sign documentation. Results: Of 42, 055 EMS calls, 808 (1.9%) were LA calls. A comparison of 784 randomly-selected non-LA control calls were reviewed. There were significantly more missing vitals (12.08% vs 6.64% p < 0.001) and refused vitals (1.87% vs 0.51% p = 0.013). Conclusion: There is a significant discrepancy in the complete documentation of vital signs in LA calls vs non-LA calls. There were also significantly more patient refusals for obtaining vitals compared to transported patients. Abnormal vital signs may be a clue to a subtle disease process that has resulted in a LA call, thus care should be taken to ensure that these patients are treated with the same standards of care and documentation as those patients calling EMS for overt medical reasons.