The effect of Helicopter Emergency Medical Services on trauma patient mortality in the Netherlands

Risk factors and mortality associated with undertriage after major trauma in a physician-led prehospital system: a retrospective multicentre cohort study

PURPOSE

To assess the incidence of undertriage in major trauma, its determinant, and association with mortality.

METHODS

A multicentre retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from a French regional trauma registry (2011-2017). All major trauma (Injury Severity Score ≥ 16) cases aged ≥ 18 years and managed by a physician-led mobile medical team were included. Those transported to a level-II/III trauma centre were considered as undertriaged. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with undertriage.

RESULTS

A total of 7110 trauma patients were screened; 2591 had an ISS ≥ 16 and 320 (12.4%) of these were undertriaged. Older patients had higher risk for undertriage (51-65 years: OR = 1.60, 95% CI [1.11; 2.26], p = 0.01). Conversely, injury mechanism (fall from height: 0.62 [0.45; 0.86], p = 0.01; gunshot/stab injuries: 0.45 [0.22; 0.90], p = 0.02), on-scene time (> 60 min: 0.62 [0.40; 0.95], p = 0.03), prehospital endotracheal intubation (0.53 [0.39; 0.71], p < 0.001), and prehospital focussed assessment with sonography [FAST] (0.15 [0.08; 0.29], p < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk for undertriage. After adjusting for severity, undertriage was not associated with a higher risk of mortality (1.22 [0.80; 1.89], p = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

In our physician-led prehospital EMS system, undertriage was higher than recommended. Advanced aged was identified as a risk factor highlighting the urgent need for tailored triage protocol in this population. Conversely, the potential benefit of prehospital FAST on triage performance should be furthered explored as it may reduce undertriage. Fall from height and penetrating trauma were associated with a lower risk for undertriage suggesting that healthcare providers should remain vigilant of the potential seriousness of trauma associated with low-energy mechanisms.

Characteristics of fatal penetrating injury; data from a retrospective cohort study in three urban regions in the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

Penetrating injury (PI) is a relatively rare mechanism of trauma in the Netherlands. Nevertheless, injuries can be severe with high morbidity and mortality rates. The aim of this study is to assess fatalities due to PI and evaluate the demographic parameters, mechanism of injury and the resulting injury patterns of this group of patients in three Dutch regions.

METHODS

Patients suffering fatal PI (stab- and gunshot injuries), in the period between July 1st 2013 and July 1st 2019, in the region of Amsterdam, Utrecht and The Hague were included. Data were collected from the electronic registration system (Formatus) of the regional departments of Forensic Medicine.

RESULTS

During the study period 283 patients died as the result of PI. The mean age was 44 years (SD 16.9), 83% was male and psychiatric history was reported in 22%. Over 60% of the injuries were due to assault and 35% was self-inflicted. Almost half of the incidents took place at home (47%). Injuries were most frequently to the head (24%) and chest (16%). Mortality was due to exsanguination (chest 27%, multiple body region's 17%, neck 9% and extremities 8%) and traumatic brain injury (21%). Up to 40% of the patients received medical treatment, surgical intervention was performed in 25%. The injuries to the extremities suggest a (potentially) preventable death rate of over 8%. Over 70% of the total population died at the scene.

CONCLUSION

Fatal PI most often involves the relatively young, male, and psychiatric patient. Self-inflicted fatal PI accounted for 35%, addressing the importance of suicide prevention programs. Identification of preventable deaths needs more awareness to reduce the number of fatal PI.

The impact of prehospital time intervals on mortality in moderately and severely injured patients

BACKGROUND

Modern trauma systems and emergency medical services aim to reduce prehospital time intervals to achieve optimal outcomes. However, current literature remains inconclusive on the relationship between time to definitive treatment and mortality. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between prehospital time and mortality.

METHODS

All moderately and severely injured trauma patients (i.e., patients with an Injury Severity Score of 9 or greater) who were transported from the scene of injury to a trauma center by ground ambulances of the participating emergency medical services between 2015 and 2017 were included. Exposures of interest were total prehospital time, on-scene time, and transport time. Outcomes were 24-hour and 30-day mortality. Generalized linear models including inverse probability weights for several potential confounders were constructed. A generalized additive model was constructed to enable visual inspection of the association.

RESULTS

We included 22,525 moderately and severely injured patients. Twenty-four-hour and 30-day mortality were 1.3% and 7.3%, respectively. On-scene time per minute was significantly associated with 24-hour (relative risk [RR], 1.029; 95% confidence interval, 1.018-1.040) and 30-day mortality (RR, 1.013; 1.008-1.017). We found that this association was also present in patients with severe injuries, traumatic brain injury, severe abdominal injury, and stab or gunshot wound. An on-scene time of 20 minutes or longer demonstrated a strong association with 24-hour (RR, 1.797; 1.406-2.296) and 30-day mortality (RR, 1.298; 1.180-1.428). Total prehospital (24-hour: RR, 0.998; 0.990-1.007; 30-day: RR, 1.000, 0.997-1.004) and transport (24-hour: RR, 0.996; 0.982-1.010; 30-day: RR, 0.995; 0.989-1.001) time were not associated with mortality.

CONCLUSION

A prolonged on-scene time is associated with mortality in moderately and severely injured patients, which suggests that a reduced on-scene time may be favorable for these patients. In addition, transport time was found not to be associated with mortality.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiologic; level III.

Vehicle Dynamics Endured by Patients during Emergency Evacuation—Ambulance versus Helicopter

In the event of a road accident, a quick intervention is crucial. The mobile emergency services take care of patients whose condition requires an emergency repatriation to a hospital, by land in an ambulance or by air in a helicopter. The main criteria for choosing the means of transport are the time required for repatriation and the patient’s more or less critical state of health. Do the vehicle dynamic effects endured by the transported patient have an influence on their health condition? Vehicle dynamics data were recorded with a road data recorder for a period of 3 months, under real conditions of patient repatriation to a hospital; 39 trips were recorded by ambulance and 29 trips by helicopter. Significant differences in speed (average 42 versus 202 km/h) and distance travelled (average 23 versus 85 km) were observed. The sustained effects are similar in helicopters and ambulances. The ambulance causes more abrupt variations in longitudinal and transversal directions, whereas the helicopter has more variations in vertical direction. The vibration level in helicopters is higher than in ambulances. These results can be considered as a first reference baseline for establishing a characterization of transported patients’ exposure to vehicle dynamics.

Evaluating the effect of driving distance to the nearest higher level trauma centre on undertriage: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

It is of great importance that emergency medical services professionals transport trauma patients in need of specialised care to higher level trauma centres to achieve optimal patient outcomes. Possibly, undertriage is more likely to occur in patients with a longer distance to the nearest higher level trauma centre. This study aims to determine the association between driving distance and undertriage.

METHOD

This prospective cohort study was conducted from January 2015 to December 2017. All trauma patients in need of specialised care that were transported to a trauma centre by emergency medical services professionals from eight ambulance regions in the Netherlands were included. Patients with critical resource use or an Injury Severity Score ≥16 were defined as in need of specialised care. Driving distance was calculated between the scene of injury and the nearest higher level trauma centre. Undertriage was defined as transporting a patient in need of specialised care to a lower level trauma centre. Generalised linear models adjusting for confounders were constructed to determine the association between driving distance to the nearest higher level trauma centre per 1 and 10 km and undertriage. A sensitivity analysis was conducted with a generalised linear model including inverse probability weights.

RESULTS

6101 patients, of which 4404 patients with critical resource use and 3760 patients with an Injury Severity Score ≥16, were included. The adjusted generalised linear model demonstrated a significant association between a 1 km (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.05) and 10 kilometre (OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.42 to 1.58) increase in driving distance and undertriage in patients with critical resource use. Also in patients with an Injury Severity Score ≥16, a significant association between driving distance (1 km (OR 1.06; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.07), 10 km (OR 1.83; 95% CI 1.71 to 1.95)) and undertriage was observed.

CONCLUSION

Patients in need of specialised care are less likely to be transported to the appropriate trauma centre with increasing driving distance. Our results suggest that emergency medical services professionals incorporate driving distance into their decision making regarding transport destinations, although distance is not included in the triage protocol.

Physician-staffed ambulance and increased in-hospital mortality of hypotensive trauma patients following prolonged prehospital stay: A nationwide study

BACKGROUND

The benefits of physician-staffed emergency medical services (EMS) for trauma patients remain unclear because of the conflicting results on survival. Some studies suggested potential delays in definitive hemostasis due to prolonged prehospital stay when physicians are dispatched to the scene. We examined hypotensive trauma patients who were transported by ambulance, with the hypothesis that physician-staffed ambulances would be associated with increased in-hospital mortality, compared with EMS personnel-staffed ambulances.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study that included hypotensive trauma patients (systolic blood pressure ≤ 90 mm Hg at the scene) transported by ambulance was conducted using the Japan Trauma Data Bank (2004-2019). Physician-staffed ambulances are capable of resuscitative procedures, such as thoracotomy and surgical airway management, while EMS personnel-staffed ambulances could only provide advanced life support. In-hospital mortality and prehospital time until the hospital arrival were compared between patients who were classified based on the type of ambulance. Inverse probability weighting was conducted to adjust baseline characteristics including age, sex, comorbidities, mechanism of injury, vital signs at the scene, injury severity, and ambulance dispatch time.

RESULTS

Among 14,652 patients eligible for the study, 738 were transported by a physician-staffed ambulance. In-hospital mortality was higher in the physician-staffed ambulance than in the EMS personnel-staffed ambulance (201/699 [28.8%] vs. 2287/13,090 [17.5%]; odds ratio, 1.90 [1.61-2.26]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.22 [1.14-1.30]; p < 0.01), and the physician-staffed ambulance showed longer prehospital time (50 [36-66] vs. 37 [29-48] min, difference = 12 [11-12] min, p < 0.01). Such potential harm of the physician-staffed ambulance was only observed among patients who arrived at the hospital with persistent hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg on hospital arrival) in subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSION

Physician-staffed ambulances were associated with prolonged prehospital stay and increased in-hospital mortality among hypotensive trauma patients compared with EMS personnel-staffed ambulance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, level IV.

Multiple trauma management in mountain environments - a scoping review : Evidence based guidelines of the International Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MedCom). Intended for physicians and other advanced life support personnel

Background

Multiple trauma in mountain environments may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared to urban environments.

Objective

To provide evidence based guidance to assist rescuers in multiple trauma management in mountain environments.

Eligibility criteria

All articles published on or before September 30th 2019, in all languages, were included. Articles were searched with predefined search terms.

Sources of evidence

PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and hand searching of relevant studies from the reference list of included articles.

Charting methods

Evidence was searched according to clinically relevant topics and PICO questions.

Results

Two-hundred forty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. Recommendations were developed and graded according to the evidence-grading system of the American College of Chest Physicians. The manuscript was initially written and discussed by the coauthors. Then it was presented to ICAR MedCom in draft and again in final form for discussion and internal peer review. Finally, in a face-to-face discussion within ICAR MedCom consensus was reached on October 11th 2019, at the ICAR fall meeting in Zakopane, Poland.

Conclusions

Multiple trauma management in mountain environments can be demanding. Safety of the rescuers and the victim has priority. A crABCDE approach, with haemorrhage control first, is central, followed by basic first aid, splinting, immobilisation, analgesia, and insulation. Time for on-site medical treatment must be balanced against the need for rapid transfer to a trauma centre and should be as short as possible. Reduced on-scene times may be achieved with helicopter rescue. Advanced diagnostics (e.g. ultrasound) may be used and treatment continued during transport.

A scoping review of worldwide studies evaluating the effects of prehospital time on trauma outcomes

BACKGROUND

Annually, over 1 billion people sustain traumatic injuries, resulting in over 900,000 deaths in Africa and 6 million deaths globally. Timely response, intervention, and transportation in the prehospital setting reduce morbidity and mortality of trauma victims. Our objective was to describe the existing literature evaluating trauma morbidity and mortality outcomes as a function of prehospital care time to identify gaps in literature and inform future investigation.

MAIN BODY

We performed a scoping review of published literature in MEDLINE. Results were limited to English language publications from 2009 to 2020. Included articles reported trauma outcomes and prehospital time. We excluded case reports, reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, comments, editorials, letters, and conference proceedings. In total, 808 articles were identified for title and abstract review. Of those, 96 articles met all inclusion criteria and were fully reviewed. Higher quality studies used data derived from trauma registries. There was a paucity of literature from studies in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), with only 3 (3%) of articles explicitly including African populations. Mortality was an outcome measure in 93% of articles, predominantly defined as "in-hospital mortality" as opposed to mortality within a specified time frame. Prehospital time was most commonly assessed as crude time from EMS dispatch to arrival at a tertiary trauma center. Few studies evaluated physiologic morbidity outcomes such as multi-organ failure.

CONCLUSION

The existing literature disproportionately represents high-income settings and most commonly assessed in-hospital mortality as a function of crude prehospital time. Future studies should focus on how specific prehospital intervals impact morbidity outcomes (e.g., organ failure) and mortality at earlier time points (e.g., 3 or 7 days) to better reflect the effect of early prehospital resuscitation and transport. Trauma registries may be a tool to facilitate such research and may promote higher quality investigations in Africa and LMICs.

The Impact of Prehospital Transport Mode on Mortality of Penetrating Trauma Patients

OBJECTIVE

The optimal mode of transport of trauma patients from the scene to the hospital remains unknown. We aimed to study the impact of different prehospital modes of transport of penetrating trauma patients on hospital mortality.

METHODS

Using the Trauma Quality Improvement Program 2010 to 2016 database, we identified all adults with a penetrating injury. Univariate then multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to study the correlation between the mode of transport and in-hospital mortality, adjusting for several covariates.

RESULTS

A total of 92,427 subjects were included. The overall mean transport time for patients transported by a ground ambulance, helicopter, fixed wing ambulance, and police/private vehicle were 32.2, 61.2, 68.9, and 28.2 minutes, respectively. Multivariable analyses revealed that compared with ground ambulance, helicopter transport was associated with a 34% decrease in the odds of mortality (odds ratio = 0.66, P < .0001), whereas police transport and private vehicle transport were associated with a 52% decrease in the odds of mortality (odds ratio = 0.48, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Helicopter, police, and private vehicle transports are associated with a decreased odds of mortality compared with ground ambulance. Further research should examine the variation in levels of care within different modes of prehospital transport.

Do pre-hospital physicians improve mortality in major trauma patients? A systematic review

Background

Optimal pre-hospital care systems contribute to improvements in trauma survival. The presence of pre-hospital physicians (PHPs) is reported to increase survival in traumatic brain injury, yet the effects of PHPs on outcomes for all trauma patients is currently unreported. The objective of this systematic review was to compare trauma mortality for patients treated by a PHP with those treated by a non-medical pre-hospital practitioner (NMPHP).

Methods

A systematic literature search (Medline, Embase, and CINAHL) was performed, on 10th March 2020, to identify original studies comparing the mortality for trauma patients treated by a PHP with those treated by a NMPHP published between 1st January 2010 and 31st December 2019. Methodological quality of studies was assessed using Grade of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

Results

The search revealed 6,296 studies and 14 met the inclusion criteria, comprising a total of 42,479 patients. Unadjusted mortality suggested a higher mortality for the physician cohort in four studies and no difference in six. However, patients treated by physicians had higher Injury Severity Scores and where adjusted mortality was provided several studies showed a mortality benefit for physicians.

Conclusion

This systematic review did not demonstrate a mortality benefit from pre-hospital physicians attending major trauma patients. However, those with higher Injury Severity Scores may benefit from the presence of a PHP. Identifying this patient cohort in the pre-hospital setting to ensure appropriate resource use requires further evaluation.

Influence of prehospital physician presence on survival after severe trauma: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As trauma is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, there is great potential for reducing mortality in trauma patients. However, there is continuing controversy over the benefit of deploying emergency medical systems (EMS) physicians in the prehospital setting. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess how out-of-hospital hospital management of severely injured patients by EMS teams with and without physicians affects mortality.

METHODS

PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles, and the search was supplemented by a hand search. Injury severity in the group of patients treated by an EMS team including a physician had to be comparable to the group treated without a physician. Primary outcome parameter was mortality. Helicopter transport as a confounder was accounted for by subgroup analyses including only the studies with comparable modes of transport. Quality of all included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane handbook.

RESULTS

There were 2,249 publications found, 71 full-text articles assessed, and 22 studies included. Nine of these studies were matched or adjusted for injury severity. The odds ratio (OR) of mortality was significantly lower in the EMS physician-treated group of patients: 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-0.92. When analysis was limited to the studies that were adjusted or matched for injury severity, the OR was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.73-1.01). Analyzing only studies published after 2005 yielded an OR for mortality of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.64-0.88) in the overall analysis and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.67-0.97) in the analysis of adjusted or matched studies. The OR was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.65-1.00) in the subgroup of studies with comparable modes of transport and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.53-1.03) in the more recent studies.

CONCLUSION

Prehospital management of severely injured patients by EMS teams including a physician seems to be associated with lower mortality. After excluding the confounder of helicopter transport we have shown a nonsignificant trend toward lower mortality.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.

Epidemiology and location of primary retrieval missions in a Scottish aeromedical service

INTRODUCTION

Prehospital critical care teams comprising an appropriately trained physician and paramedic or nurse have been associated with improved outcomes in selected trauma patients. These teams are a scarce and expensive resource, especially when delivered by rotary air assets. The optimal tasking of prehospital critical care teams is therefore vital and remains a subject of debate. Emergency Medical Retrieval Service (EMRS) provides a prehospital critical care response team to incidents over a large area of Scotland either by air or by road.

METHODS

A convenience sample of consecutive EMRS missions covering a period of 18 months from May 2013 to January 2015 was taken. These missions were matched with the ambulance service information on geographical location of the incident. In order to assess the appropriateness of tasking, interventions undertaken on each mission were analysed and divided into two subcategories: 'critical care interventions' and 'advanced medical interventions'. A tasking was deemed appropriate if it included either category of intervention or if a patient was pronounced life extinct at the scene.

RESULTS

A total of 1279 primary missions were undertaken during the study period. Of these, 493 primary missions met the inclusion criteria and generated complete location data. The median distance to scene was calculated as 5.6 miles for land responses and 34.2 miles for air responses. Overall, critical care interventions were performed on 17% (84/493) of patients. A further 21% (102/493) of patients had an advanced medical intervention. Including those patients for whom life was pronounced extinct on scene by the EMRS team, a total of 42% (206/493) taskings were appropriate.

DISCUSSION

Overall, our data show a wide geographical spread of tasking for our service, which is in keeping with other suburban/rural models of prehospital care. Tasking accuracy is also comparable to the accuracy shown by other similar services.

Effect of Physician-Staffed Emergency Medical Services (P-EMS) on the Outcome of Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Review of the Literature

Introduction: Traumatic injury is the fourth leading cause of death in western countries and the leading cause of death in younger age. However, it is still unclear which groups of patients benefit most from advanced prehospital trauma care. A minimal amount is known about the effect of prehospital physician-based care on patients with specifically traumatic brain injury (TBI). The aim of this review is to assess the effect of physician-staffed Emergency Medical Services (EMS) on the outcome of patients with severe TBI. Methods: Literature searches have been performed in the bibliographic databases of PubMed, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library. Data concerning (physician-staffed) prehospital care for patients with severe TBI were only included if the control group was based on non-physician-staffed EMS. Primarily the mortality rate and secondarily the neurological outcome were examined. Additionally, data concerning hypotension, hypoxia, length of stay (hospital and intensive care unit) and the number of required early neurosurgical interventions were taken into account. Results: The overall mortality was decreased in three of the fourteen included studies after the implementation of a physician in the prehospital setting. One study found also a decrease in mortality only for patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale of 6-8. Strikingly, two other studies reported higher mortality, one for all the included patients and one for patients with GCS 10-12 only. Neurological outcome was improved in five studies after prehospital deployment of a physician. One study reported that more patients had a poor neurological outcome in the P-EMS group. Results of the remaining outcome measures differed widely. Conclusion: The included literature did not show a clear beneficial effect of P-EMS in the prehospital management of patients with severe TBI. The available evidence showed contradictory results, suggesting more research should be performed in this field with focus on decreasing heterogeneity in the compared groups.

Prehospital on-scene anaesthetist treating severe traumatic brain injury patients is associated with lower mortality and better neurological outcome

BACKGROUND

Patients with isolated traumatic brain injury (TBI) are likely to benefit from effective prehospital care to prevent secondary brain injury. Only a few studies have focused on the impact of advanced interventions in TBI patients by prehospital physicians. The primary end-point of this study was to assess the possible effect of an on-scene anaesthetist on mortality of TBI patients. A secondary end-point was the neurological outcome of these patients.

METHODS

Patients with severe TBI (defined as a head injury resulting in a Glasgow Coma Score of ≤8) from 2005 to 2010 and 2012-2015 in two study locations were determined. Isolated TBI patients transported directly from the accident scene to the university hospital were included. A modified six-month Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS) was defined as death, unfavourable outcome (GOS 2-3) and favourable outcome (GOS 4-5) and used to assess the neurological outcomes. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to predict mortality and good neurological outcome. The following prognostic variables for TBI were available in the prehospital setting: age, on-scene GCS, hypoxia and hypotension. As per the hypothesis that treatment provided by an on-scene anaesthetist would be beneficial to TBI outcomes, physician was added as a potential predictive factor with regard to the prognosis.

RESULTS

The mortality data for 651 patients and neurological outcome data for 634 patients were available for primary and secondary analysis. In the primary analysis higher age (OR 1.06 CI 1.05-1.07), lower on-scene GCS (OR 0.85 CI 0.79-0.92) and the unavailability of an on-scene anaesthetist (OR 1.89 CI 1.20-2.94) were associated with higher mortality together with hypotension (OR 3.92 CI 1.08-14.23). In the secondary analysis lower age (OR 0.95 CI 0.94-0.96), a higher on-scene GCS (OR 1.21 CI 1.20-1.30) and the presence of an on-scene anaesthetist (OR 1.75 CI 1.09-2.80) were demonstrated to be associated with good patient outcomes while hypotension (OR 0.19 CI 0.04-0.82) was associated with poor outcome.

CONCLUSION

Prehospital on-scene anaesthetist treating severe TBI patients is associated with lower mortality and better neurological outcome.

A novel method of non-clinical dispatch is associated with a higher rate of critical Helicopter Emergency Medical Service intervention

Background

Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) are a scarce resource that can provide advanced emergency medical care to unwell or injured patients. Accurate tasking of HEMS is required to incidents where advanced pre-hospital clinical care is needed. We sought to evaluate any association between non-clinically trained dispatchers, following a bespoke algorithm, compared with HEMS paramedic dispatchers with respect to incidents requiring a critical HEMS intervention.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from two 12-month periods was performed (Period one: 1st April 2014 – 1st April 2015; Period two: 1st April 2016 – 1st April 2017). Period 1 was a Paramedic-led dispatch process. Period 2 was a non-clinical HEMS dispatcher assisted by a bespoke algorithm. Kent, Surrey & Sussex HEMS (KSS HEMS) is tasked to approximately 2500 cases annually and operates 24/7 across south-east England. The primary outcome measure was incidence of a HEMS intervention.

Results

A total of 4703 incidents were included; 2510 in period one and 2184 in period two. Variation in tasking was reduced by introducing non-clinical dispatchers. There was no difference in median time from 999 call to HEMS activation between period one and two (period one; median 7 min (IQR 4–17) vs period two; median 7 min (IQR 4–18). Non-clinical dispatch improved accuracy of HEMS tasking to a mission where a critical care intervention was required (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.04–1.51, p = 0.02).

Conclusion

The introduction of non-clinical, HEMS-specific dispatch, aided by a bespoke algorithm improved accuracy of HEMS tasking. Further research is warranted to explore where this model could be effective in other HEMS services.

Education, exposure and experience of prehospital teams as quality indicators in regional trauma systems

OBJECTIVE

Indicators to measure the quality of trauma care may be instrumental in benchmarking and improving trauma systems. This retrospective, observational study investigated whether data on three indicators for competencies of Dutch trauma teams (i.e. education, exposure, experience; agreed upon during a prior Delphi procedure) can be retrieved from existing registrations. The validity and distinctive power of these indicators were explored by analysing available data in four regions.

METHODS

Data of all polytrauma patients treated by the Helicopter Emergency Medical Services were collected retrospectively over a 1-year period. During the Delphi procedure, a polytrauma patient was defined as one with a Glasgow Coma Scale of 9 or less or a Paediatric Coma Scale of 9 or less, together with a Revised Trauma Score of 10 or less. Information on education, exposure and experience of the Helicopter Emergency Medical Services physician and nurse were registered for each patient contact.

RESULTS

Data on 442 polytrauma patients could be retrieved. Of these, according to the Delphi consensus, 220 were treated by a fully competent team (i.e. both the physician and the nurse fulfilled the three indicators for competency) and 22 patients were treated by a team not fulfilling all three indicators for competency. Across the four regions, patients were treated by teams with significant differences in competencies (P=0.002).

CONCLUSION

The quality indicators of education, exposure and experience of prehospital physicians and nurses can be measured reliably, have a high level of usability and have distinctive power.

Impact of Prehospital Transportation on Survival in Skiers and Snowboarders with Traumatic Brain Injury

INTRODUCTION

Prehospital helicopter use and its impact on outcomes in snowboarders and skiers incurring traumatic brain injury (TBI) is unknown. The present study investigates the association of helicopter transport with survival of snowboarders and skiers with TBI, in comparison with ground emergency medical services (EMS), by using data derived from the National Trauma Data Bank (2007-2014).

METHODS

Primary and secondary endpoints were defined as in-hospital survival and absolute risk reduction based upon number needed to transport (treat) respectively. Multivariable regression models including traditional logit model, model fitted with generalized estimating equations, and those incorporating results from propensity score matching methods were used to investigate the association of helicopter transport with survival compared with ground EMS.

RESULTS

Of the 1018 snowboarders and skiers who met the criteria, 360 (35.4%) were transported via helicopters whereas 658 (64.6%) via ground EMS with a mortality rate of 1.7% and 1.5%, respectively. Multivariable log-binomial models demonstrated association of prehospital helicopter transport with increased survival (odds ratio 8.58; 95% confidence interval 1.09-67.64; P = 0.041; absolute risk reduction: 10.06%). This finding persisted after propensity score matching (odds ratio 24.73; 95% confidence interval 5.74-152.55; P < 0.001). The corresponding absolute risk reduction implies that approximately 10 patients need to be transported via helicopter to save 1 life.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our robust statistical analysis of retrospective data, our findings suggest prehospital helicopter transport improved survival in patients incurring TBI after snowboard- or ski-related falls compared with those transported via ground EMS. Policies directed at using helicopter services at remote winter resorts or ski or snowboarding locations should be implemented.

Hospital Mortality Based on the Mode of Emergency Medical Services Transportation

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the presentations and outcomes of trauma patients transported by helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) versus ground emergency medical services (GEMS).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of trauma registry data at a level I trauma center was conducted for patients transported by GEMS and HEMS between 2011 and 2013. Data were analyzed and categorized based on the mode of transportation.

RESULTS

A total of 4,596 trauma patients were admitted to the hospital with a mean age of 31 ± 15 years. Injured patients were transported to the trauma center by GEMS (93.3%) and HEMS (6.7%). The common mechanisms of injury were motor vehicle crash (37%) and falls (25%). Compared with GEMS, patients transported by HEMS were characterized by having a greater injury severity, more proportion of traumatic brain injury, on-scene intubation, and a 2.5-fold higher mortality. However, the impact of mode of transportation on the hospital mortality among severely injured patients has disappeared after adjusting for potential confounders.

CONCLUSION

Patients transported by HEMS may have different characteristic features and outcomes when compared with GEMS. However, further work is needed to identify the subgroups of trauma patients who clearly benefit from the use of HEMS.

It's All About Location, Location, Location: A New Perspective on Trauma Transport

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of aeromedical transport on trauma mortality when accounting for geographic factors.

BACKGROUND

The existing literature on the mortality benefit of aeromedical transport on trauma mortality is controversial. Studies examining patient and injury characteristics find higher mortality, whereas studies measuring injury severity find a protective effect. Previous studies have not adjusted for the time and distance that would have been traveled had a helicopter not been used.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of an institutional trauma registry. We compared mortality among adult patients (≥15 years) transported from the scene of injury to our level I trauma center by air or ground (January 1, 2000-December 31, 2010) using univariate comparisons and multivariable logistic regression. Regression models were constructed to incrementally account for patient demographics and injury mechanism, followed by injury severity, and, finally, by network bands for drive time and roadway distance as predicted by geographic information systems.

RESULTS

Of 4522 eligible patients, 1583 (35%) were transported by air. Patients transported by air had higher unadjusted mortality (4.1% vs 1.9%, P < 0.05). In multivariable modeling, including patient demographics and type of injury, helicopter transport predicted higher mortality than ground transport (odds ratio [OR] 2.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-4.0). After adding validated injury severity measures to the model, helicopter transport predicted lower mortality (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.3-0.9). Finally, including geographic covariates found that helicopter transport was not associated with mortality (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.6-2.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Helicopter transport does not impart a survival benefit for trauma patients when geographic considerations are taken into account.

Impact of Helicopter Emergency Medical Service in Traumatized Patients: Which Patient Benefits Most?

INTRODUCTION

The Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) was established for the prehospital trauma care of patients. Improved rescue times and increased coverage areas are discussed as specific advantages of HEMS. We recently found evidence that HEMS exerts beneficial effects on outcomes for severely injured patients. However, it still remains unknown which group of trauma patients might benefit most from HEMS rescue. Consequently, the unique aim of this study was to reveal which patients might benefit most from HEMS rescue.

METHODS

Trauma patients (ISS ≥9) primarily treated by HEMS or ground emergency medical services (GEMS) between 2002 and 2012 were analysed using the TraumaRegister DGU. A multivariate regression analysis was used to reveal the survival benefit between different trauma populations.

RESULTS

The study included 52 281 trauma patients. Of these, 68.8% (35 974) were rescued by GEMS and 31.2% (16 307) by HEMS. HEMS patients were more severely injured compared to GEMS patients (ISS: HEMS 24.8±13.5 vs. GEMS 21.7±18.0) and more frequently suffered traumatic shock (SBP sys <90mmHg: HEMS 18.3% vs. GEMS 14.8%). However, logistic regression analysis revealed that HEMS rescues resulted in an overall survival benefit compared to GEMS (OR 0.81, 95% CI [0.75-0.87], p<0.001, Nagelkerke's R squared 0.526, area under the ROC curve 0.922, 95% CI [0.919-0.925]). Analysis of specific subgroups demonstrated that patients aged older than 55 years (OR 0.62, 95% CI [0.50-0.77]) had the highest survival benefit after HEMS treatment. Furthermore, HEMS rescue had the most significant impact after 'low falls' (OR 0.68, 95% CI [0.55-0.84]) and in the case of minor severity injuries (ISS 9-15) (OR 0.66, 95% CI [0.49-0.88]).

CONCLUSIONS

In general, trauma patients benefit from HEMS rescue with in-hospital survival as the main outcome parameter. Focusing on special subgroups, middle aged and older patients, low-energy trauma, and minor severity injuries had the highest survival benefit when rescued by HEMS. Further studies are required to determine the potential reasons of this benefit.

Helicopter emergency medical services for adults with major trauma

BACKGROUND

Although helicopters are presently an integral part of trauma systems in most developed nations, previous reviews and studies to date have raised questions about which groups of traumatically injured people derive the greatest benefit.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) transport, compared with ground emergency medical services (GEMS) transport, is associated with improved morbidity and mortality for adults with major trauma.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran the most recent search on 29 April 2015. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; CENTRAL), MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (OvidSP), CINAHL Plus (EBSCOhost), four other sources, and clinical trials registers. We screened reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible trials included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized intervention studies. We also evaluated nonrandomized studies (NRS), including controlled trials and cohort studies. Each study was required to have a GEMS comparison group. An Injury Severity Score (ISS) of at least 15 or an equivalent marker for injury severity was required. We included adults age 16 years or older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We applied the Downs and Black quality assessment tool for NRS. We analyzed the results in a narrative review, and with studies grouped by methodology and injury type. We constructed 'Summary of findings' tables in accordance with the GRADE Working Group criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 38 studies, of which 34 studies examined survival following transportation by HEMS compared with GEMS for adults with major trauma. Four studies were of inter-facility transfer to a higher level trauma center by HEMS compared with GEMS. All studies were NRS; we found no RCTs. The primary outcome was survival at hospital discharge. We calculated unadjusted mortality using data from 282,258 people from 28 of the 38 studies included in the primary analysis. Overall, there was considerable heterogeneity and we could not determine an accurate estimate of overall effect.Based on the unadjusted mortality data from six trials that focused on traumatic brain injury, there was no decreased risk of death with HEMS. Twenty-one studies used multivariate regression to adjust for confounding. Results varied, some studies found a benefit of HEMS while others did not. Trauma-Related Injury Severity Score (TRISS)-based analysis methods were used in 14 studies; studies showed survival benefits in both the HEMS and GEMS groups as compared with MTOS. We found no studies evaluating the secondary outcome, morbidity, as assessed by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Four studies suggested a small to moderate benefit when HEMS was used to transfer people to higher level trauma centers. Road traffic and helicopter crashes are adverse effects which can occur with either method of transport. Data regarding safety were not available in any of the included studies. Overall, the quality of the included studies was very low as assessed by the GRADE Working Group criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to the methodological weakness of the available literature, and the considerable heterogeneity of effects and study methodologies, we could not determine an accurate composite estimate of the benefit of HEMS. Although some of the 19 multivariate regression studies indicated improved survival associated with HEMS, others did not. This was also the case for the TRISS-based studies. All were subject to a low quality of evidence as assessed by the GRADE Working Group criteria due to their nonrandomized design. The question of which elements of HEMS may be beneficial has not been fully answered. The results from this review provide motivation for future work in this area. This includes an ongoing need for diligent reporting of research methods, which is imperative for transparency and to maximize the potential utility of results. Large, multicenter studies are warranted as these will help produce more robust estimates of treatment effects. Future work in this area should also examine the costs and safety of HEMS, since multiple contextual determinants must be considered when evaluating the effects of HEMS for adults with major trauma.

Short-term outcome and differences between rural and urban trauma patients treated by mobile intensive care units in Northern Finland: a retrospective analysis

Background

Emergency medical services are an important part of trauma care, but data comparing urban and rural areas is needed. We compared 30-day mortality and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay for trauma patients injured in rural and urban municipalities and collected basic data on trauma care in Northern Finland.

Methods

We examined data from all trauma patients treated by the Finnish Helicopter Emergency Medical Services in 2012 and 2013. Only patients surviving to hospital were included in the analysis but all pre-hospital deaths were recorded. All data was retrieved from the national Helicopter Emergency Medical Services database, medical records, and the Finnish Causes of Death Registry. Patients were defined as urban or rural depending on the type of municipality where the injury occurred.

Results

A total of 472 patients were included. Age and Injury Severity Score did not differ between rural and urban patients. The pre-hospital time intervals and distances to trauma centers were longer for rural patients and a larger proportion of urban patients had intentional injuries (23.5 % vs. 9.3 %, P <0.001). The 30-day mortality for severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score >15) was 23.9 % in urban and 13.3 % in rural municipalities. In the multivariate regression analysis the odds ratio (OR) for 30-day mortality was 2.8 (95 % confidence interval 1.0 to 7.9, P = 0.05) in urban municipalities. There was no difference in the length of ICU stay or scores. Twenty patients died on scene or during transportation and 56 missions were aborted because of pre-hospital death.

Conclusions

The severely injured urban trauma patients had a trend toward higher 30-day mortality compared with patients injured in rural areas but the length of ICU stay was similar. However, more pre-hospital deaths occurred in rural municipalities. The time before mobile ICU arrival appears to be critical for trauma patients’ survival, especially in rural areas.

Survival benefit of physician-staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) assistance for severely injured patients

BACKGROUND

Physician-staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) provide specialist medical care to the accident scene and aim to improve survival of severely injured patients. Previous studies were often underpowered and showed heterogeneous results, leaving the subject at debate. The aim of this retrospective, adequately powered, observational study was to determine the effect of physician-staffed HEMS assistance on survival of severely injured patients.

METHODS

All consecutive severely injured trauma patients (ISS >15) between October 1, 2000 and February 28, 2013 were included. Assistance of physician-staffed HEMS was compared with assistance from the ambulance paramedic crew (i.e., EMS group) only. A regression model was constructed for calculating the expected survival and survival benefit.

RESULTS

A total of 3543 polytraumatised patients with an ISS >15 were treated at the Emergency Department, of whom 2176 patients remained for analysis; 1495 (69%) were treated by EMS only and 681 (31%) patients received additional pre-hospital care of HEMS. The model with the best fit and diagnostic properties (H-L coefficient 2.959, p=0.937; AUC 0.888; PPV 71.4%; NPV 88.0%) calculated that 36 additional patients survived because of HEMS assistance. This resulted in an average of 5.33 additional lives saved per 100 HEMS dispatches for severely injured patients.

CONCLUSION

The present study indicates an additional 5.33 lives saved per 100 dispatches of the physician-staffed HEMS. Given the excellent statistical power of this study (>90%), physician-staffed HEMS is confirmed to be an evidence-based valuable addition to the EMS systems in saving lives of severely injured patients.

One-year outcome after prehospital intubation

BACKGROUND

The aim of physician staffed emergency medical services (EMS) is to supplement other EMS units in the care of prehospital patients. The need for advanced airway management in critical prehospital patients can be considered as one indicator of the severity of the patient's condition. Our primary aim was to study the long-term outcome of critically ill patients (excluding cardiac arrest) who were intubated by EMS physicians in the prehospital setting.

METHODS

Data of 845 patients, whose airways were secured by the EMS physicians during a 5-year (2007-2011) period, were retrospectively evaluated. After exclusions, the outcome of 483 patients (8.9% of all patients treated by EMS) was studied. Evaluation was based on hospital patient records 1 year after the incident. For assessment of neurological outcome, a modified Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS) was used. Time and cause of death were recorded.

RESULTS

55.3% of the study patients had a good neurological recovery (GOS 4-5) with independent life 1 year after the event. The overall 1-year mortality (GOS 1) was 35.0%. Poor neurological outcome (GOS 2-3) was found in 9.7% of the patients. Patients with intoxication or convulsions survived best, while those with suspected intracranial pathology had the worst prognosis. Of all survivors, 85% recovered well.

CONCLUSION

The majority of the study patients had a favourable neurological recovery with independent life at 1 year after the incident. More than 80% of all deaths occurred within 30 days of the incident.

Pre-hospital rescue times and actions in severe trauma. A comparison between two trauma systems: Germany and the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of national pre-hospital rescue strategies on the status of severely injured patients at the time of admission to a Trauma Center (TC) in Germany or the Netherlands.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective database analysis based on the TraumaRegister DGU(®) (TR-DGU) of the German Trauma Society compares the pre-hospital trauma system of Germany with three Trauma Centers (TCs) from the Netherlands. It comprises trauma patients from 2009 to 2012 admitted to a Level I TC, all patients aged 16-80 years primarily admitted with an ISS ≥ 16 and data available for mode of transport, pre-hospital measures and total pre-hospital time. Additionally three subgroups were formed by mode of transportation and involved personnel: Ambulance/Physician, Helicopter/Physician, Ambulance/EMT. Primary endpoint is the patient's status at the time of admission to the trauma room. Secondary endpoint is hospital mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 12,168 patients met the inclusion criteria. Major differences in the injury patterns, pre-hospital rescue time, transport strategy and actions are documented. The mean ISS in the German overall group was 28.6 ± 12.2 compared to 27.4 ± 12.8 in the Dutch overall group. In the subgroups the highest injury severity with 29.8 ± 12.7 for German patients and 31.0 ± 14.6 for Dutch patients was found in the Helicopter/Physician subgroups and the lowest in patients transported by ambulance under emergency medical technician (EMT) care i.e. 24.2 ± 8.9 for German patients and 23.6 ± 10.3 for Dutch patients. The mean total pre-hospital time for patients admitted to Dutch TCs of 53.8 ± 28.7 min was 15.1 min shorter than for patients transported to German TCs 68.7 ± 28.6 min. The overall mean pre-hospital volume replacement of 1103 ± 821 ml for German patients was about twice as high as for Dutch patients (541 ± 700 ml). In physician led subgroups in the Netherlands higher rates of intubation, catecholamine administration and chest tubes are recorded. The basic vital signs from on-scene to hospital admission did not show relevant changes. Additional parameters available in the trauma room revealed a lower mean Base Excess (BE) for Dutch patients and a diminished mean prothrombin ratio for German patients. No reliable evidence was found that differences in the mortality analysis resulted from different national pre-hospital strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

Many differences in the national pre-hospital strategy were demonstrated but the effect on patient's status at the time of admission to trauma room remains unclear. A follow-up study, which mitigates the now known injury patterns has to be initiated to further substantiate the findings of this study.

Ten years of helicopter emergency medical services in Germany: do we still need the helicopter rescue in multiple traumatised patients?

BACKGROUND

Helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) has been established in the preclinical treatment of multiple traumatised patients despite an ongoing controversy towards the potential benefit. Celebrating the 20th anniversary of TraumaRegister DGU(®) of the German Trauma Society (DGU) the presented study intended to provide an overview of HEMS rescue in Germany over the last 10 years analysing the potential beneficial impact of a nationwide helicopter rescue in multiple traumatised patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We analysed TraumaRegister DGU(®) including multiple traumatised patients (ISS ≥ 16) between 2002 and 2012. In-hospital mortality was defined as main outcome. An adjusted, multivariate regression with 13 confounders was performed to evaluate the potential survival benefit.

RESULTS

42,788 patients were included in the present study. 14,275 (33.4%) patients were rescued by HEMS and 28,513 (66.6%) by GEMS. Overall, 66.8% (n=28,569) patients were transported to a level I trauma centre and 28.2% (n=12,052) to a level II trauma centre. Patients rescued by HEMS sustained a higher injury severity compared to GEMS (ISS HEMS: 29.5 ± 12.6 vs.

ISS GEMS

27.5 ± 11.8). Helicopter rescue teams performed more on-scene interventions, and mission times were increased in HEMS rescue (HEMS: 77.2 ± 28.7 min. vs. GEMS: 60.9 ± 26.9 min.). Linear regression analysis revealed that the frequency of HEMS rescue has decreased significantly between 2002 and 2012. In case of transportation to level I trauma centres a decrease of 1.7% per year was noted (p<0.001) while a decline of 1.6% per year (p<0.001) was measured for level II trauma centre admissions. According to multivariate logistic regression HEMS was proven a positive independent survival predictor between 2002 and 2012 (OR 0.863; 95%-CI 0.800-0.930; Nagelkerkes-R(2) 0.539) with only little differences between each year.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was able to prove an independent survival benefit of HEMS in multiple traumatised patients during the last 10 years. Despite this fact, a constant decline of HEMS rescue missions was found in multiple trauma patients due to unknown reasons. We concluded that HEMS should be used more often in case of trauma in order to guarantee the proven benefit for multiple traumatised patients.

[On-scene times for helicopter services. Influence of central dispatch center strategy]

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have suggested that when using several emergency systems and air rescue prehospital and on-scene times are extended, depending on the dispatch strategy. Emergency medical services (EMS) in Germany are delivered by ambulances (AMB) staffed by paramedics alone or with physicians (EMD) and by helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) always staffed by both. The advantages of HEMS in countries with short transport distances and high hospital density are controversial. The best dispatching strategy for HEMS has not been determined

OBJECTIVE

The BoLuS study in the German state of Hessen was designed to evaluate the influence of dispatch strategy on prehospital times for responses involving both HEMS and EMS.

METHODS

Rescue responses involving HEMS were prospectively evaluated in 12 regions of Hessen from July 2010 to September 2011. Although all regions had access to HEMS, only one had its own service. Data from both central dispatch centers and helicopter services were collected and combined to calculate the on-scene time (OST) and correlate it with dispatch strategy.

RESULTS

A total of 2111 emergency interventions were evaluated. Internal medicine emergencies accounted for 42.9 % of cases and trauma for 36.7 %. Just one patient was involved in 87.9 % of rescues. Two services were involved in 65.3 % of rescues and three or more in 31.5 %. The most common dispatch categories were initial dispatch of EMS and HEMS (50.6 %), initial dispatch of EMS with later request for HEMS (19.7 %) and initial dispatch of both EMS and EMD with later request for HEMS (17.4 %). The OST for these categories were 31.0 ± 13.7 min, 43.7 ± 16.2 min and 54.6 ± 21.3 min (p < 0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSION

OST varies significantly depending on the number of EMS involved and the dispatch strategy. Sequential dispatching of ground and later HEMS wastes time. Getting an emergency physician to the scene as quickly as possible, reducing transport time to an appropriate hospital and caring for more complex emergencies are the main indications for HEMS. If HEMS appears likely to be needed, it should be dispatched immediately.

[Importance of helicopter rescue]

Helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) have become a main part of prehospital emergency medical services over the last 40 years. Recently, an ongoing discussion about financial shortage and personal shortcomings question the role of cost-intensive air rescue. Thus, the value of HEMS must be examined and discussed appropriately. Since the number of physician-staffed ground ambulances may decrease due to the limited availability of qualified physicians, HEMS may fill the gap. In addition patient transfer to specialized hospitals will require an increasing number of air transports in order to minimize prehospital time. The higher risk ratio for HEMS missions when compared with ground rescue requires a rigorous quality management system. When it comes to missions in remote and exposed areas, the scope of medical treatment must be adjusted to the individual situation. Medical competence is key in order to balance guideline compliant or maximal care versus optimal care characterized as a mission-specific, individualized emergency care concept. Although, medical decision making and treatment is typically based on the best scientific evidence, personal skills, competence, and the mission scenario will determine the scope of interventions suitable to improve outcome. Thus, the profile of requirements for the HEMS medical crew is high.

Effects of physician-based emergency medical service dispatch in severe traumatic brain injury on prehospital run time

INTRODUCTION

Prehospital care by physician-based helicopter emergency medical services (P-HEMS) may prolong total prehospital run time. This has raised an issue of debate about the benefits of these services in traumatic brain injury (TBI). We therefore investigated the effects of P-HEMS dispatch on prehospital run time and outcome in severe TBI.

METHODS

Prehospital run times of 497 patients with severe TBI who were solely treated by a paramedic EMS (n = 125) or an EMS/P-HEMS combination (n = 372) were retrospectively analyzed. Other study parameters included the injury severity score (ISS), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), prehospital endotracheal intubation and predicted and observed outcome rates.

RESULTS

Patients who received P-HEMS care were younger and had higher ISS values than solely EMS-treated patients (10%; P = 0.04). The overall prehospital run time was 74 ± 54 min, with similar out-of-hospital times for EMS and P-HEMS treated patients. Prehospital endotracheal intubation was more frequently performed in the P-HEMS group (88%) than in the EMS group (35%; P<0.001). The prehospital run time for intubated patients was similar for P-HEMS (66 (51-80)min) and EMS-treated patients (59 (41-88 min). Unexpectedly, mortality probability scores and observed outcome scores were less favourable for EMS-treated patients when compared to patients treated by P-HEMS.

CONCLUSION

P-HEMS dispatch does not increase prehospital run times in severe TBI, while it assures prehospital intubation of TBI patients by a well-trained physician. Our data however suggest that a subgroup of the most severely injured patients received prehospital care by an EMS, while international guidelines recommend advanced life support by a physician-based EMS in these cases.