Impact of Helicopter Transport on Reperfusion Times and Long-Term Outcomes in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients in Rural Areas: A Report From the Mie Acute Coronary Syndrome Registry

Aeromedical Transport for Critically Ill Patients

Aeromedical transport (AMT) is an integral part of healthcare systems worldwide. In this article, the personnel and equipment required, associated safety considerations, and evidence supporting the use of AMT is reviewed, with an emphasis on helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS). Indications for HEMS as guideded by the Air Medical Prehospital Triage Score are presented. Lastly, physiologic considerations, which are important to both AMT crews and receiving clinicians, are reviewed.

A Retrospective Geospatial Simulation Study of Helicopter Emergency Medical Services' Potential Time Benefit Over Ground Ambulance Transport in Northern South Africa

OBJECTIVE

One of the most important benefits of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) is a time benefit, either through expedited access to the casualty or a reduction in the transport time to definitive care. However, HEMS utilization does not come without risk to the public and crew or at an insignificant cost. Cost is an essential consideration for health policy decisions, especially in low- to middle-income countries, such as South Africa. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a time benefit of HEMS dispatch in South Africa compared with simulated driving time. A secondary aim was to determine the distance from the incident site to the hospital at which a time benefit can be guaranteed.

METHODS

A retrospective study was undertaken by comparing the prehospital times of patients who underwent HEMS transportation with simulated ground emergency medical services (GEMS) transportation times. Handwritten patient records of actual flights were reviewed and analyzed. The actual flight times recorded were used to calculate the helicopter transport time, activation to scene time, scene time, and scene to hospital time. Times were assigned based on a nonsimultaneous dispatch model, as is used in South Africa. For each helicopter mission, Google Maps (Google Inc, Mountain View, CA) was used to simulate the fastest ground route from the same location of the incident to the same receiving hospital corrected for typical traffic trends. The actual HEMS and simulated GEMS times were compared using the paired t-test. Linear regression analysis was performed to determine a minimum driving distance at which HEMS provides a time benefit.

RESULTS

A total of 118 HEMS transports were analyzed, the majority of which were trauma related (n = 115, 97%). HEMS transport resulted in a mean time deficit of -15 minutes (95% confidence interval, -18 to -11; P < .05) compared with simulated GEMS drive times. After regression, HEMS transport provides a time benefit at a driving distance greater than 119 km.

CONCLUSION

The current study demonstrated that there was rarely a time benefit for actual primary emergency responses when HEMS was used compared with simulated driving time of GEMS transport. Using a nonsimultaneous dispatch model, a time benefit only occurs when the driving distance from the incident site to the hospital is greater than 119 km. There is an urgent need to critically evaluate HEMS utilization in the South African context.

Demographic Trends and Changes in the Pre- and In-Hospital Medical Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction During the First 12 Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Mie Prefecture ― Report From the Mie ACS Registry ―

Background: Even though hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) decreased globally during the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, limited information is available on subsequent demographic trends in the number of cases and management of AMI through the first 12 months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods and Results: We assessed demographic trends, patient characteristics, and AMI outcomes (n=730) during the first 12 months of the COVID-19 pandemic and compared them with corresponding months during the control period (February 2016–January 2020; n=2,742) using data from the Mie ACS Registry. Although a 25.8% reduction in hospitalizations for AMI was observed in the 3 months following the declaration of a state of emergency (47.7 vs. 64.3/month; P=0.002), the total number of AMI patients was similar between the 12-month COVID-19 and control periods (60.8 vs. 57.2/month; P=0.58). The number of patients requiring direct ambulance transport was lower in the first half of the COVID-19 than control period (44.4% vs. 51.5; P=0.028). In-hospital mortality was higher in the second half of the COVID-19 than control period (8.9% vs. 5.8%; P=0.032).

Conclusions: Through the first 12 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of AMI cases was similar to that in previous years. The COVID-19 pandemic changed the behavior of AMI patients and both pre- and in-hospital medical management, which significantly affected the severity and prognosis of AMI.