Helicopter Emergency Medical Services in Buenos Aires: An Operational Overview

Can Helicopters Solve the Transport Dilemma for Patients With Symptoms of Large-Vessel Occlusion Stroke in Intermediate Density Areas? A Simulation Model Based on Real Life Data

Background

This modeling study aimed to determine if helicopters may optimize the transportation of patients with symptoms of large vessel stroke in “intermediate density” areas, such as Denmark, by bringing them directly to the comprehensive stroke center.

Methods

We estimated the time for the treatment of patients requiring endovascular therapy or intravenous thrombolysis under four configurations: “drip and ship” with and without helicopter and “bypass” with and without helicopter. Time delays, stroke numbers per municipality, and helicopter dispatches for four helicopter bases from 2019 were obtained from the Danish Stroke and Helicopter Registries. Discrete event simulation (DES) was used to estimate the capacity of the helicopter fleet to meet patient transport requests, given the number of stroke codes per municipality.

Results

The median onset-to-needle time at the comprehensive stroke center (CSC) for the bypass model with the helicopter was 115 min [interquartile range (IQR): 108, 124]; the median onset-to-groin time was 157 min (IQR: 150, 166). The median onset-to-needle time at the primary stroke center (PSC) by ground transport was 112 min (IQR: 101, 125) and the median onset-to-groin time when primary transport to the PSC was prioritized was 234 min (IQR: 209, 261).

A linear correlation between travel time by ground and the number of patients transported by helicopter (rho = 0.69, p < 0.001) indicated that helicopters are being used to transport more remote patients. DES demonstrated that an increase in helicopter capture zone by 20 min increased the number of rejected patients by only 5%.

Conclusions

Our model calculations suggest that using helicopters to transport patients with stroke directly to the CSC in intermediate density areas markedly reduce onset-to-groin time without affecting time to thrombolysis. In this setting, helicopter capacity is not challenged by increasing the capture zone.

Barriers to Trauma Care in South and Central America: a systematic review

Introduction

Trauma is widespread in Central and South America and is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Providing high quality emergency trauma care is of great importance. Understanding the barriers to care is challenging; this systematic review aims to establish current the current challenges and barriers in providing high-quality trauma care within the 21 countries in the region.

Methods

OVID Medline, Embase, EBM reviews and Global Health databases were systematically searched in October 2020. Records were screened by two independent researchers. Data were extracted according to a predetermined proforma. Studies of any type, published in the preceding decade were included, excluding grey literature and non-English records. Trauma was defined as blunt or penetrating injury from an external force. Studies were individually critically appraised and assessed for bias using the RTI item bank.

Results

57 records met the inclusion criteria. 20 countries were covered at least once. Nine key barriers were identified: training (37/57), resources and equipment (33/57), protocols (29/57), staffing (17/57), transport and logistics (16/57), finance (15/57), socio-cultural (13/57), capacity (9/57), public education (4/57).

Conclusion

Nine key barriers negatively impact on the provision of high-quality trauma care and highlight potential areas for improving care in Central & South America. Many countries in the region, along with rural areas, are under-represented by the current literature and future research is urgently required to assess barriers to trauma management in these countries.

No funding was received. Clinical Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020220380.

Helicopter Transportation of Brazilian Trauma Patients: A Comparison of Times to Care

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to analyze helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) transport with secondary land ambulance transfer, comparing landings performed inside and outside the hospital complex to the emergency department.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional observational study of HEMS transports of trauma patients between 2016 and 2018 in southern Brazil. Patients were attended by the HEMS team at the trauma site or stabilized in hospitals nearby and subsequently referred to trauma centers. In this region, no trauma centers have their own helipads so helicopters land in remote areas close to the hospital, which may be inside or outside the hospital complex. Both landings require ground emergency medical service transport, with off-site landings necessitating ground emergency medical service transport via public access roads to reach the hospital. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and on-site and off-site transport times were compared using a t-test for independent samples.

RESULTS

Of 176 transports, 28.5% resulted in on-site landings, whereas 71.5% occurred off-site. The ground transport time when the landing zone was off-site was 5 minutes longer than on-site (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Off-site landings result in longer transports to the emergency room. The construction of helipads in trauma centers can reduce transport time, in addition to reducing the costs and sequelae of trauma.