Helicopter Scene Transport of Trauma Patients with Nonlife-Threatening Injuries: A Meta-Analysis

Association of Geographic Distance and Hospital Characteristics With Use of Interhospital Transfer by Air: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

Interhospital transfer by air (IHTA) represents the majority of helicopter air ambulance transports in the United States, but the evaluation of what factors are associated with utilization has been limited. We aimed to assess the association of geographic distance and hospital characteristics (including patient volume) with the use of IHTA.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, retrospective study of helicopter flight request data from 2018 provided by a convenience sample of 4 critical care transport medicine programs in 3 US census regions. Nonfederal referring hospitals located in the home state of the associated critical care transport medicine program and within 100 miles of the primary receiving facility in the region were included if complete data were available. We fit a Poisson principal component regression model incorporating geographic distance, the number of emergency department visits, the number of hospital discharges, case mix index, the number of intensive care unit beds, and the number of general beds and tested the association of the variables with helicopter emergency medical services utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 106 referring hospitals were analyzed, 21 of which were hospitals identified as having a consistent request pattern. Using the hospitals with a consistent referral pattern, geographic distance had a significant positive association with flight request volume. Other variables, including emergency department visit volume, were not associated. Overall, the included variables offered poor explanatory power for the observed variation between referring facilities in the use of IHTA (r2 = 0.09). Predicted flights based on the principal component regression model for all referring hospitals suggested the majority of referring hospitals used multiple flight programs.

CONCLUSION

Geographic distance is associated with the use of IHTA. Unexpectedly, most basic hospital characteristics are not associated with the use of IHTA, and the degree of variation between referring facilities that is explained by patient volume is limited. The evaluation of nonhospital factors, such as the density and availability of critical care or advanced life support ground emergency medical services resources, is needed.

Validation of Air Medical Prehospital Triage Score in Determining Resource Utilization at Level 1 Trauma Centers

OBJECTIVE

Overtriage (ie, delivering less severely injured patients via helicopter) is costly, raises safety concerns, and reduces efficiency of the trauma system. The Air Medical Prehospital Triage (AMPT) scoring system was developed to determine which trauma patients would gain a survival benefit by air transport. The objective of this study was to evaluate the AMPT scoring system as a method of reducing trauma overtriage when helicopter emergency medical services were used.

METHODS

A retrospective study of all scene trauma transports delivered by helicopter to 1 of 2 level 1 trauma centers was evaluated for 1) hospital stay less than 1 day and 2) failure to meet 1 of the following criteria for resource utilization: intensive care unit admission, an operative procedure within the first 24 hours, the need for blood products, Injury Severity Score ≥ 16, or death during hospitalization. Helicopter emergency medical services personnel recorded specific criteria from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) field trauma triage guidelines and AMPT that were met by transported trauma patients.

RESULTS

There were 244 patients in the study population. Eighty-one (33.2%) patients were discharged within 24 hours; 11 (13.5%) of these patients were positive using AMPT scoring, whereas 44 (54.3%) patients met 1 of the CDC criteria. Similarly, 141 (57.8%) patients failed to meet 1 of the level 1 resource criteria; 19 (13.5%) met the AMPT criteria for air medical transport, whereas 84 (59.6%) met 1 of the CDC criteria. Undertriage was 63.5% for AMPT and 20.2% for CDC based on resource utilization criteria.

CONCLUSION

The AMPT score reduced the number of patients who were inappropriately transported to a trauma center. However, this appeared to be at the expense of undertriage. Future studies should focus on developing a refined air medical-specific triage tool that has both low overtriage rates as well as lower undertriage rates.

Which Method of Transportation Is Associated With Better Outcomes for Patients With Firearm Injuries to the Head and Neck?

BACKGROUND

In firearm injuries (FI), rapid transportation is important for survival. Information regarding different methods of transportation for head and neck FI is limited.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to measure the association between method of transportation and the need for tracheostomy and/or intensive care unit (ICU).

STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE

This retrospective cross-sectional study reviewed patients in Trauma Registry at Grady Memorial Hospital (GMH) in Atlanta, Georgia, from January 2016 to June 2021. Patients ≥18 years old who sustained FI to the head and neck and were transported via ground emergency medical services (GEMS) or helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) were included. Patients who arrived at the hospital by foot, private vehicle, or transported from a different hospital were excluded.

PREDICTOR/EXPOSURE/INDEPENDENT VARIABLE

The primary predictor variable was method of transportation (GEMS: ambulance transportation to GMH vs HEMS: helicopter transportation to GMH helipad).

MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE(S)

The primary outcome variables were tracheostomy (yes/no) and ICU admission (yes/no).

COVARIATES

Patient, injury, and hospital-related covariates were collected.

ANALYSES

Univariate analysis, χ2 test for categorical variables, and independent t test for continuous variables were calculated. Statistical significance was P < .05.

RESULTS

Of total, 609 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 560 patients (483 males) with a mean age of 33.6 years old (range, 18 to 90) transported by GEMS. There were 49 patients (40 males) with a mean age of 44 years old (range, 18 to 82) transported by HEMS. Patients transported by HEMS were statistically more likely to have longer transportation time in minutes [13.2 (range, 5 to 132) versus 24.2 (range, 9 to 46), P= <.001], lower Glasgow Coma Scale score [9.9 (range, 3 to 15) versus 6.3 (range, 3 to 15); P= <.001], higher Injury Severity Score [19.3 (range, 3.7 to 98) versus 24.2 (range, 10.3 to 98); P = .007], require transfusion [195 (34.8%); versus 26 (53.1%); P = .013], tracheostomy [46(8.2%) versus 13 (26.5%); P = <.001], and/or admitted to ICU [169, 30.2% versus 24 (49%); P = .007].

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

HEMS was positively associated with more tracheostomy and/or ICU admission. Additionally, patients transported by HEMS experienced longer transportation time and severe injuries. HEMS triage criteria specific for FI to the head and neck should be developed.

Direct Trauma Center Access by Helicopter Emergency Medical Services is Associated With Improved Survival After Severe Injury

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the association of survival with helicopter transport directly to a trauma center compared with ground transport to a non-trauma center (NTC) and subsequent transfer.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Helicopter transport improves survival after injury. One potential mechanism is direct transport to a trauma center when the patient would otherwise be transported to an NTC for subsequent transfer.

METHODS

Scene patients 16 years and above with positive physiological or anatomic triage criteria within PTOS 2000-2017 were included. Patients transported directly to level I/II trauma centers by helicopter were compared with patients initially transported to an NTC by ground with a subsequent helicopter transfer to a level I/II trauma center. Propensity score matching was used to evaluate the association between direct helicopter transport and survival. Individual triage criteria were evaluated to identify patients most likely to benefit from direct helicopter transport.

RESULTS

In all, 36,830 patients were included. Direct helicopter transport was associated with a nearly 2-fold increase in odds of survival compared with NTC ground transport and subsequent transfer by helicopter (aOR 2.78; 95% CI 2.24-3.44, P <0.01). Triage criteria identifying patients with a survival benefit from direct helicopter transport included GCS≤13 (1.71; 1.22-2.41, P <0.01), hypotension (2.56; 1.39-4.71, P <0.01), abnormal respiratory rate (2.30; 1.36-3.89, P <0.01), paralysis (8.01; 2.03-31.69, P <0.01), hemothorax/pneumothorax (2.34; 1.36-4.05, P <0.01), and multisystem trauma (2.29; 1.08-4.84, P =0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct trauma center access is a mechanism driving the survival benefit of helicopter transport. First responders should consider helicopter transport for patients meeting these criteria who would otherwise be transported to an NTC.

Air Rescue for Pediatric Trauma in a Metropolitan Region of Brazil: Profiles, Outcomes, and Overtriage Rates

Besides ensuring a quick response and transport of trauma victims, helicopter support also involves risks to patients and professionals and has higher operational costs. Studying prehospital triage criteria and their relationship with patient overtriage and outcomes is important, particularly in newly established services and in developing countries with limited health budgets. This could help improve the use of the helicopter rescue and provide better management of the costs and risks related to it. The objective of this study was to determine the epidemiologic and severity profiles of pediatric victims of trauma attended by helicopter in a Brazilian Metropolitan Area to evaluate the outcomes and overtriage rates related to pediatric air rescue in the region. We conducted an observational and retrospective study using 49 hospital and prehospital records from victims of trauma aged <18 years old (yo) assisted by helicopter and then transferred to a tertiary University Hospital. Of the 49 patients, 39 (79.6%) individuals were male, and the mean age was 11.3 yo. Vehicular collisions accounted for 15 (30.6%) of the traumas, and traumatic brain injuries occurred in 28 (57.1%) cases. A total of 29 (59.1%) individuals had severe trauma (Injury Severity Score; ISS >15), and 34 (69.4%) required admission to the intensive care unit. Overtriage varied from 18.4 to 40.8% depending on the criteria used for its definition, being more frequent in individuals aged between 1 and 5 yo. Death occurred in 10 (20.4%) patients. On prehospital evaluation, we classified 29/32 (90.6%) patients with severe trauma according to the Pediatric Trauma Score (PTS ≤8) and 18/25 (72%) according to the Revised Trauma Score (RTS ≤11). Of these, 7/29 (24.1%) and 6/18 (33.3%), respectively, presented ISS <15 at in-hospital evaluation. None of the patients with PTS >8 and 3/7 (42.8%) of those with RTS >11 presented ISS >15. In conclusion, air rescue of pediatric trauma victims was used mainly for critically ill individuals, resulting in rates of overtriage compatible with that found in the literature. PTS showed the lowest rates of overtriage within excellent rates of undertriage.

Association of Pre-Hospital Helicopter Transport with Reduced Mortality in Traumatic Brain Injury in Japan: A Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study

Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) are severely injured patients who require timely, efficient, and specialized care. The effectiveness of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) for patients with TBI remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the mortality of patients with TBI transported by HEMS and ground ambulance using propensity score-matching analysis, and to analyze the effects of HEMS in various subpopulations. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Japan Trauma Data Bank. The study period was from January 2004 to December 2018. The participants were divided into two groups: the helicopter group (patients transported by HEMS) and ground group (patients transported by ground ambulance). The principal outcome was death at hospital discharge. In total, 58,532 patients were eligible for analysis (ground group, n = 54,820 [93.7%]; helicopter group, n = 3712 [6.3%]). Helicopter transport decreased patient mortality at hospital discharge (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.92). In propensity score-matched patients, the proportion of deaths at hospital discharge was lower in the helicopter (18.76%) than in the ground (21.21%) group (crude OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.96). The mortality rate in the helicopter group was significantly reduced in many subpopulations, especially in cases of severe TBI with a decreased level of consciousness or higher Injury Severity Score (ISS; Japan Coma Scale score 2 [adjusted OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45-0.80] and ISS ≥50 [adjusted OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.48-0.99]). Although the study design was non-randomized, our findings in patients with TBI showed that HEMS conferred a mortality benefit over ground ambulance.

Prehospital personnel discretion pediatric trauma team activations: Too much of a good thing?

PURPOSE

Trauma team activation is essential to provide rapid assessment of injured patients, however excessive utilization can overburden systems. We aimed to identify predictors of over triage and evaluate impact of prehospital personal discretion trauma activations on the over triage rate.

METHODS

Retrospective comparative study of pediatric trauma patients (<18 years) evaluated after activation of the trauma team to those evaluated as a trauma consult treated between 2010 and 2013. Cohort matching of trauma activated and consult patients was done on the basis of patients' age and ISS.

RESULTS

1363 patients including 359 trauma team activations were evaluated. Median age was 6 years, Injury Severity Score (ISS) 4, 116 (8.5%) required operative intervention and 20 (1.4%) died. Matched analysis using age and ISS showed trauma activated patients were more likely to have penetrating MOI (4.7% vs.1.7%; p = 0.03) and need ICU admission(32.9% vs.16.7%; p = 0.0001). State of Florida discrete criteria based trauma activated patients when compared to paramedic discretion activations had a higher ISS (9 vs.5; p = 0.014), need for ICU admission (36.5% vs.20.4%; p = 0.004), ICU LOS(2 vs.0 days; p = 0.02), hospital LOS(2 vs.2 days; p = 0.014) and higher likelihood of death(4.9% vs.0%;p = 0.0001). Moreover, paramedic discretion trauma activated patients were similar to trauma consult patients in terms of ISS score(p = 0.86), need for ICU admission(p = 0.86), operative intervention(p = 0.86), death(p = 0.86) and hospital LOS(p = 0.86), with a considerably higher cost of care(p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSION

Discrete criteria-based trauma team activations appear to more reliably identify patients likely to benefit from initial multidisciplinary management.

Appropriate Air Medical Services Utilization and Recommendations for Integration of Air Medical Services Resources into the EMS System of Care: A Joint Position Statement and Resource Document of NAEMSP, ACEP, and AMPA

Air medical services involves providing medical care in transit while using either fixed wing (airplane) or rotor wing (helicopter) aircraft to move patients between locations. The modern use and availability of air medical services has expanded access to various health system resources, including specialty care. While this is generally beneficial, such expansion has also contributed to the complexity of health care delivery systems.(1, 2) Since the publication of the 2013 joint position statement Appropriate and Safe Utilization of Helicopter Emergency Medical Services,(3) research has shown that patient benefit is gained from the clinical care capabilities of air medical services independent of potential time saved when transporting patients.(4-6) Because the evidence basis for utilization of air medical services continues to evolve, NAEMSP, ACEP, and AMPA believe that an update regarding the appropriate utilization of air medical services is warranted, and that such guidance for utilization can be divided into three major categories: clinical considerations, safety considerations, and system integration and quality assurance considerations.

Identifying causes of delay in interfacility transfer of patients by air ambulance

OBJECTIVES

Population density can limit the level of care that can be provided in local facilities in Ontario, and as such, patients with severe illnesses often require interfacility transfers to access specialized care. This study aimed to identify causes of delay in interfacility transport by air ambulance in Ontario.

METHODS

Causes of delay were identified by manual review of electronic patient care records (ePCRs). All emergent interfacility transfers conducted by Ornge, the sole provider of air-based medical transport in Ontario, between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016 were included. The ePCRs were reviewed if they met one or more of the following: (1) contained a standardized delay code; (2) contained free text including "delay", "wait", or "duty-out"; (3) were above the 75th percentile in total transport time; or (4) were above the 90th percentile in time to bedside, time at the sending hospital, or time to receiving facility.

RESULTS

Our search strategy identified 1,220 ePCRs for manual review, which identified a total of 872 delays. Common delays cited included aircraft refueling (234 delays), waiting for land emergency medical service (EMS) escort (146), and staffing- or dispatch-related issues (124). Other delays included weather/environmental hazards (43); mechanical issues (36); and procedures, imaging, or stabilization (80).

CONCLUSIONS

Some common causes of interfacility delay are potentially modifiable: better trip planning around refueling and improved coordination with local EMS, could reduce delays experienced during interfacility trips. To better understand causes of delay, we would benefit from improved documentation and record availability which limited the results in this study.

Time-saving effects using helicopter transportation: comparison to a ground transportation time predicted using a social navigation software

Previous comparison studies regarding 2 types of transportation, helicopter (HEMS) versus ground emergency medical services (GEMS), have shown underlying heterogeneity as these options have completely different routes and consequent times with reference to one patient. To compare the 2 types of transportation on a case-by-case basis, we analyzed the retrospectively reviewed HEMS and predicted GEMS data using an open-source navigation software.Patients transferred by military HEMS from 2016 to 2019 were retrospectively enrolled. The HEMS records on the time of notification, injury point and destination address, and time required were reviewed. The GEMS data on distance and the predicted time required were acquired using open-source social navigation systems. Comparison analyses between the two types of transportation were conducted. Furthermore, linear logistic regression analyses were performed on the distance and time of the two options.A total of 183 patients were enrolled. There was no statistical difference (P = .3021) in the distance between the 2 types of transportation, and the HEMS time was significantly shorter than that of GEMS (61.31 vs 116.92 minutes, P < .001). The simple linear curves for HEMS and GEMS were separately secured, and two graphs presented the statistical significance (P) as well as reasonable goodness-of-fit (R2). In general, the HEMS graph demonstrates a more gradual slope and narrow distribution compared to that of GEMS.Ideally, HEMS is identified as a better transportation modality because it has a shorter transportation time (56 minutes saved) and a low possibility of potential time delays (larger R2). With a strict patient selection, HEMS can rescue injured or emergent patients who are "out of the golden hour."

A Bayesian Approach on Investigating Helicopter Emergency Medical Fatal Accidents

INTRODUCTION: Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) is a mode of transportation designed to expedite the transport of a patient. Compared to other modes of emergency transport and other areas of aviation, historically HEMS has had the highest accident-related fatality rates. Analysis of these accident data has revealed factors associated with an increased likelihood of accident-based fatalities. Here we report the results of an analysis on the likelihood of a fatality based on various factors as a result of a HEMS accident, employing a Bayesian framework.METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using data extracted from the NTSB aviation accident database from April 31, 2005, to April 26, 2018. Evidence from Baker et al. (2006) was also used as prior information spanning from January 1, 1983, to April 30, 2005.RESULTS: A Bayesian logistic regression was implemented using the prior information and current data to calculate a posterior distribution confidence interval of possible values in predicting accident fatality. The results of the model indicate that flying at night (OR 3.06; 95 C.I 2.14, 4.48; PoD 100), flying under Instrument Flight Rules (OR 7.54; 95 C.I 3.94, 14.44; PoD 100), and post-crash fires (OR 18.73; 95 C.I 10.07, 34.12; PoD 100) significantly contributed to the higher likelihood of a fatality.CONCLUSION: Our results provide a comprehensive analysis of the most influential factors associated with an increased likelihood of a fatal accident occurring. We found that over the past 35 yr these factors were consistently associated with a higher likelihood of a fatality occurring.Simonson RJ, Keebler JR, Chaparro A. A Bayesian approach on investigating helicopter emergency medical fatal accidents. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2021; 92(7):563569.

Geospatial assessment of helicopter emergency medical service overtriage

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence of benefit after injury, helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) overtriage remains high. Scene and transfer overtriage are distinct processes. Our objectives were to identify geographic variation in overtriage and patient-level predictors, and determine if overtriage impacts population-level outcomes.

METHODS

Patients 16 years or older undergoing scene or interfacility HEMS in the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcomes Study were included. Overtriage was defined as discharge within 24 hours of arrival. Patients were mapped to zip code, and rates of overtriage were calculated. Hot spot analysis identified regions of high and low overtriage. Mixed-effects logistic regression determined patient predictors of overtriage. High and low overtriage regions were compared for population-level injury fatality rates. Analyses were performed for scene and transfer patients separately.

RESULTS

A total of 85,572 patients were included (37.4% transfers). Overtriage was 5.5% among scene and 11.8% among transfer HEMS (p < 0.01). Hot spot analysis demonstrated geographic variation in high and low overtriage for scene and transfer patients. For scene patients, overtriage was associated with distance (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.06 per 10 miles; p = 0.04), neck injury (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.01-1.60; p = 0.04), and single-system injury (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.15-1.64; p < 0.01). For transfer patients, overtriage was associated with rurality (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.22-2.21; p < 0.01), facial injury (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03-1.44; p = 0.02), and single-system injury (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.18-2.19; p < 0.01). For scene patients, high overtriage was associated with higher injury fatality rate (coefficient, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.68-1.76; p < 0.01); low overtriage was associated with lower injury fatality rate (coefficient, -0.73; 95% CI, -0.78 to -0.68; p < 0.01). For transfer patients, high overtriage was not associated with injury fatality rate (p = 0.53); low overtriage was associated with lower injury fatality rate (coefficient, -2.87; 95% CI, -4.59 to -1.16; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Geographic overtriage rates vary significantly for scene and transfer HEMS, and are associated with population-level outcomes. These findings can help guide targeted performance improvement initiatives to reduce HEMS overtriage.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, level IV.

Air transportation over-utilization in pediatric trauma patients

BACKGROUND

Air transportation can be a life-saving transfer modality for trauma patients. However, it is also costly and carries risk for air-crews and patients. We sought to examine the incidence of air transportation among pediatric trauma patients as well as the rate of over-triage in utilizing this intervention.

METHODS

We conducted a single-institution retrospective review of all pediatric trauma patients who utilized air transportation, either from scene to hospital or hospital to hospital Emergency Department (ED) transfers, between 2013 and 2018.

RESULTS

There were 348 pediatric trauma patients who utilized air transport. More than half of all patients (n = 186, 55.9%) were discharged from the hospital within 48 h, 121 (36.3%) were discharged within 24 h, and 34 (10.2%) were discharged home from the ED. The mean ISS was 11.2 ± 0.5 while only 31% had an ISS ≥15. There were 97 patients (27.9%) with elevated age adjusted shock index, and 101 patients (29.0%) who required time sensitive interventions. More than half of patients (59.3%) were initially taken to an outside hospital (OSH) and were then transferred to our facility by air while 40.4% were transported directly from scene to our institution by air. Patients who were transferred from an OSH were younger (6.8 ± 0.4 vs 11.2 ± 0.4, p < 0.01) and had a higher incidence of an elevated age-adjusted shock index (32.4% vs 19.1%, p = 0.006) as well as mortality (6.3% vs 1.4%, p = 0.03). However, ultimately there were no differences in ISS, rates of operative intervention, PICU utilization, or time sensitive intervention. Both groups had similarly high rates of discharge within 48 h, 24 h, and from the ED.

CONCLUSIONS

Air transportation among pediatric trauma patients from scene to hospital and hospital to hospital is over-utilized based on multiple metrics including low rates of ISS ≥15, elevated age-adjusted shock indexes, low rates of time sensitive intervention, as well as high rates of discharge within 24 and 48 h.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III TYPE OF STUDY: Clinical Research-retrospective review.

Early Hospital Discharge After Helicopter Transport of Pediatric Trauma Patients: Analysis of Rates of Over and Undertriage

OBJECTIVES

Helicopter air ambulance (HAA) of pediatric trauma patients is a life-saving intervention. Triage remains a challenge for both scene transport and interhospital transfer of injured children. We aimed to understand whether overtriage or undertriage was a feature of scene or interhospital transfer and how in or out of state transfers affected these rates.

METHODS

Children (<18 years) who underwent trauma activation at a level I trauma center between 2011 and 2013 were identified and reviewed. Patients transported by HAA were compared with those transported by ground ambulance (GA).

RESULTS

Of 399 pediatric patients (median age, 10.4 years; range, 0.1-17 years; 264 male [66%]), 71 (18%) were transported by HAA. Seventy-two percent of HAA patients went to the intensive care unit or the operating room from the trauma bay or suffered in-hospital mortality (vs 42% GA, P < 0.001). More patients were overtriaged (HAA with injury severity score [ISS] of <15) from interhospital transfers than from the scene (25% vs 3%, P = 0.002). Undertriage (GA with ISS >15) was acceptable at 5% from the scene and 14% from interhospital transfers (P = 0.08). Overtriage of patients with ISS less than 15 to HAA was significantly lower from in-state hospitals (22%) than out-of-state hospitals (45%) (P = 0.02). Undertriage of patients with ISS greater than 15 to GA was also lower from in-state hospitals (20%) versus out-of-state hospitals (38%) (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Triage of pediatric trauma patients to HAA remains difficult. There remains potential for improvement, particularly as regards interhospital HAA overtriage, but well developed transfer protocols (such in-state protocols) may help.

Stop Flying the Patients! Evaluation of the Overutilization of Helicopter Transport of Trauma Patients

INTRODUCTION

Helicopter transport is a resource intensive and expensive method for transportation of patients by helicopter. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the appropriateness of helicopter transport determined by procedural care within 1-h of transfer at an urban level I trauma center.

METHODS

All trauma patients transported by helicopter from January 2015-December 2017 to an urban level I trauma center from referring hospitals or the scene were retrospectively analyzed. A subgroup analysis was performed evaluating patients that required a procedure or operation within 1-h of transport compared with the remainder of the patient cohort who were transported via helicopter.

RESULTS

A total of 1590 patients were transported by helicopter. Thirty-nine percent of patients (n = 612) were admitted directly to the floor from the trauma bay and 16% (n = 249) of patients required only observation or were discharged home after helicopter transfer. Approximately one-third of the entire study cohort (36%, n = 572) required any procedure, with a median time to procedure of 31.5 h (interquartile range 54.4). Only 13% (n = 74) required a procedure within 1-h of helicopter transport. The average distance (in miles) if the patient had been driven by ground transport rather than helicopter was 67.0 miles (SD ± 27.9) and would take an estimated 71.5 min (±28.4) for patients who required a procedure within 1-h compared with 61.6 miles (SD ± 30.9) with an estimated 66.1 min (SD ± 30.8) for the remainder of the cohort (P value 0.899 and 0.680, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrates that helicopter transport was not necessary for the vast majority of trauma patients transported via helicopter.

Helicopter and ground emergency medical services transportation to hospital after major trauma in England: a comparative cohort study

Background

The utilization of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) in modern trauma systems has been a source of debate for many years. This study set to establish the true impact of HEMS in England on survival for patients with major trauma.

Methods

A comparative cohort design using prospectively recorded data from the UK Trauma Audit and Research Network registry. 279 107 patients were identified between January 2012 and March 2017. The primary outcome measure was risk adjusted in-hospital mortality within propensity score matched cohorts using logistic regression analysis. Subset analyses were performed for subjects with prehospital Glasgow Coma Scale <8, respiratory rate <10 or >29 and systolic blood pressure <90.

Results

The analysis was based on 61 733 adult patients directly admitted to major trauma centers: 54 185 ground emergency medical services (GEMS) and 7548 HEMS. HEMS patients were more likely male, younger, more severely injured, more likely to be victims of road traffic collisions and intubated at scene. Crude mortality was higher for HEMS patients. Logistic regression demonstrated a 15% reduction in the risk adjusted odds of death (OR=0.846; 95% CI 0.684 to 1.046) in favor of HEMS. When analyzed for patients previously noted to benefit most from HEMS, the odds of death were reduced further but remained statistically consistent with no effect. Sensitivity analysis on 5685 patients attended by a doctor on scene but transported by GEMS demonstrated a protective effect on mortality versus the standard GEMS response (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95).

Discussion

This prospective, level 3 cohort analysis demonstrates a non-significant survival advantage for patients transported by HEMS versus GEMS. Despite the large size of the cohort, the intrinsic mismatch in patient demographics limits the ability to statistically assess HEMS true benefit. It does, however, demonstrate an improved survival for patients attended by doctors on scene in addition to the GEMS response. Improvements in prehospital data and increased trauma unit reporting are required to accurately assess HEMS clinical and cost-effectiveness.

Impact of Physician-staffed Helicopters on Pre-hospital Patient Outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Management of pre-hospital patients remains a challenge. In developed countries a physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical service (PS-HEMS) is used in addition to ground emergency medical service (GEMS), but the effect is debated. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effect of PS-HEMS compared with GEMS on patient outcomes based on the published scientific literature.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched on November 15, 2019 for prospective, interventional studies comparing outcomes of patients transported by either PS-HEMS or GEMS. Outcomes of interest were mortality, time to hospital and quality of life.

RESULTS

The majority of 18 studies included were observational and difficult to summarize because of heterogeneity. Meta-analysis could not be carried out. Three studies found reduced mortality in patients transported by PS-HEMS compared with GEMS with Odds ratios (OR) of 0.68 (0.47-0.98); 0.29 (0.10-0.82) and 0.21 (0.06-0.73) respectively. Another two studies found improved survival with OR 1.2 (1.0-1.5) and 6.9 (1.48-32.5) in patients transported by PS-HEMS compared with GEMS. In three studies, PS-HEMS was associated with shorter time to hospital. Three studies reported quality of life and found no benefit of PS-HEMS.

CONCLUSION

In this systematic review the studies comparing PS-HEMS with GEMS were difficult to summarize because of heterogeneity. We found a possible survival benefit of PS-HEMS but were unable to conduct a meta-analysis. The overall quality of evidence was low.

Helicopter Transport Has Decreased Over Time and Transport From Scene or Hospital Matters

OBJECTIVE

Several reports have found helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) to be associated with a lower risk of mortality compared with ground emergency medical services (GEMS); however, most studies did not control for transport time or stratify interfacility versus scene. We hypothesize that the HEMS transport rate has decreased nationally and that the risk of mortality for HEMS is similar to GEMS when adjusting for transport time and stratifying by scene or interfacility.

METHODS

The Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2010-2016) was queried for adult patients transported by HEMS or GEMS. Multivariable logistic regression was used.

RESULTS

The HEMS transport rate decreased by 38.2% from 2010 to 2016 (P < .001). After controlling for known predictors of mortality and transport time, HEMS was associated with a decreased risk of mortality compared with GEMS for adult trauma patient transports (odds ratio = 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.77; P < .001). Compared with GEMS, HEMS transports from the scene were associated with a decreased risk of mortality (OR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.60-0.66; P < .001), whereas HEMS interfacility transfer was associated with an increased risk of mortality (OR = 1.22; 95% CI, 1.14-1.31; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The rate of HEMS transports in trauma has decreased by nearly 40% over the past 7 years. Our results suggest that HEMS use for scene transports is beneficial for the survival of trauma patients.

Most Patients Undergoing Ground And Air Ambulance Transportation Receive Sizable Out-Of-Network Bills

"Surprise" out-of-network bills have come under close scrutiny, and while ambulance transportation is known to be a large component of the problem, its impact is poorly understood. We measured the prevalence and financial impact of out-of-network billing in ground and air ambulance transportation. For members of a large national insurance plan in 2013-17, 71 percent of all ambulance rides involved potential surprise bills. For both ground and air ambulances, out-of-network charges were substantially greater than in-network prices, resulting in median potential surprise bills of $450 for ground transportation and $21,698 for air transportation. Though out-of-network air ambulance bills were larger, out-of-network ground ambulance bills were more common, with an aggregate impact of $129 million per year. Out-of-network air ambulance bills averaged $91 million per year, rising from $41 million in 2013 to $143 million in 2017. Federal proposals to limit surprise out-of-network billing should incorporate protections for patients undergoing ground or air ambulance transportation.

Aeromedical helicopter transport of prisoners: The Mexico City experience

INTRODUCTION

Helicopter medical transport of prisoner patients has unique logistical and medical challenges, as well as potential risks to healthcare providers. Prisoners have specific requirements for safe transport, and it is of paramount importance to know the variables related to transport related mortality since most prisoners that need air evacuation are critically ill. Because we understand that there is a potentially dangerous nature of transport of this population, and because of the unique nature of them, we aimed to provide a detailed insight on predictors of outcome in prisoners who were injured as a result of trauma and that needed to be transported via air medical transport in Mexico City.

METHODS

A retrospective chart analysis was conducted using data from the Mexico City Police Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) for air medical transport of felons that occurred between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2013. Subject demographics, injury, procedures performed, transport time, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), and mortality were collected. Exploratory data analysis, Chi-square, and T-test were performed. Statistical significance was assumed to be p ≤ 0.05 for two-sided hypothesis.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients were included in this study. Forty-two were men and 11 were women. Median age of the patients was 30 ± 8 years. Total transport time was 23 ± 5 min. Gunshot wounds accounted for 39.6% of patients, stabbing wounds 28.3%, head trauma 7.5%, motor vehicle accidents 5.7%, blunt trauma (i.e., fist assaults) 5.6%, falls 5.7%, motorcycle accidents 3.8%, and prisoner-motor vehicle collisions 3.8%. Median heart rate was 114 ± 41 beats per minute (BPM), median systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 103 ± 14 mmHg, median diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was 70 ± 12 mmHg, and median GCS was 10 ± 5. Mortality rate was 16.9% (n = 9). The variables that were statistically significant, and therefore related to mortality were: heart rate > 130 bpm (p < 0.001), SBP <95 mmHg (p = 0.039), GCS <7 (p = 0.040), age > 42 years (range, 17-47 years) p < 0.001, and need for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

As dangerous and challenging as it may seem, air medical transport of prisoners by a police crew physician, may be safe and reliable, since no complications or safety events were observed.

Characteristics of scene trauma patients discharged within 24-hours of air medical transport

Introduction

Helicopters play an important role in trauma; however, this service comes with safety risks, high transport costs, and downstream care charges.

Objective

Our objective was to determine the characteristics of early discharged trauma patients (<24 h length of stay) in order to reduce overtriage.

Methodology

Data were obtained from the trauma registries at one of two Level 1 trauma centers. Eligible patients included all scene trauma patients transported by helicopter to the Level 1 trauma centers from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2017, who had a length of stay of 24 h or less. Patient factors such as age, gender, scene location, loaded miles, and transportation costs were collected. Trauma type, mechanism of injury, Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS), Injury Severity Score, Revised Trauma Score, and prehospital vital signs were documented. Driving distances between the accident scene to local hospital, home of record to local hospital, and home of record to the Level I trauma center were also calculated for patients transported to Level 1 trauma center.

Results

Two hundred and twenty-six of 1042 total patients (21.7%) were discharged within 24 h of helicopter transport from the accident scene to trauma center. Less than 2% of patients were in the age group of 70 years or older. Only 2 (0.88%) patients discharged within 24 h had a prehospital systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg. For patients transported to Level 1 trauma center, the average loaded miles were 50.51 ± 14.99, with average transport charges being $27,921.19± $3536.61. Twenty-one percent of Level 1 trauma center patients were self-pay, and families typically drove 71.7 ± 123.23 miles to Level 1 trauma center versus 28.74 ± 40.62 to their local emergency department.

Conclusions

A significant number of patients transported from the scene are discharged within 24 h of admission to a trauma center. These patients rarely have prehospital hypotension, do not receive significant volumes of crystalloid resuscitation, and are infrequently over 70 years of age. One in five patients has no third-party coverage and assumes $27,921.19 in average transport charges.

Are there Field Triage Criteria that Can Predict Low-Yield Air Medical Transports?

INTRODUCTION

Air medical transport of trauma patients from the scene of injury plays a critical role in the delivery of severely injured patients to trauma centers. Over-triage of patients to trauma centers reduces the system efficiency and jeopardizes safety of air medical crews.

HYPOTHESIS

The objective of this study was to determine which triage factors utilized by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) providers are strong predictors of early discharge for trauma patients transported by helicopter to a trauma center.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review over a two-year period was performed for trauma patients flown from the injury site into a Level I trauma center by an air medical transport program. Demographic and clinical data were collected on each patient. Prehospital factors such as Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), intubation status, mechanism of injury, anatomic injuries, physiologic parameters, and any combinations of these factors were investigated to determine which triage criteria accurately predicted early discharge. Hospital factors such as Injury Severity Score (ISS), length-of-stay (LOS), survival, and emergency department disposition were also collected. Early discharge was defined as a hospital stay of less than 24 hours in a patient who survives their injuries. A more stringent definition of appropriate triage was defined as a patient with in-hospital death, an ISS >15, those taken to the operating room (OR) or intensive care unit (ICU), or those receiving blood products. Those patients who failed to meet these criteria were also used to determine over-triage rates.

RESULTS

An overall early discharge rate of 35% was found among the study population. Furthermore, when the more stringent definition was applied, over-triage rates were as high as 85%. Positive predictive values indicated that patients who met at least one anatomic and physiologic criteria were appropriately transported by helicopter as 94% of these patients had stays longer than 24 hours. No other criteria or combination of criteria had a high predictive value for early discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

No individual triage criteria or combination of criteria examined demonstrated the ability to uniformly predict an early discharge. Although helicopter transport and subsequent hospital care is costly and resource consuming, it appears that a significant number of patients will be discharged within 24 hours of their transport to a trauma center. Future studies must determine the impact of eliminating "low-yield" triage criteria on under-triage of scene trauma patients.

Identifying Predictors of Undertriage in Injured Older Adults After Implementation of Statewide Geriatric Trauma Triage Criteria

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to identify factors associated with transport of injured older adults meeting statewide geriatric trauma triage criteria to a trauma center.

METHODS

An observational retrospective cohort study using the 2009 to 2011 Ohio Trauma Registry. Subjects were adults ≥ 70 years old who met Ohio's geriatric triage criteria for trauma center transport by emergency medical services. We created multivariable logistic regression models to identify predictors of initial and ultimate (e.g., interfacility transfer) transport to a Level I or II trauma center and to a Level I, II, or III center.

RESULTS

Of 10,411 subjects, 47% were initially and 59% were ultimately transported to a Level I or II trauma center with rates of 66 and 74%, respectively, for transport to a Level I, II, or III center. For initial transport to a Level I or II center, age 80 to 89 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.89), age ≥ 90 (OR = 0.76), and either only a Level 3 (OR = 0.3) or no trauma center (OR = 0.11) in county of residence had decreased odds of transport, while male sex (OR = 1.38), black race (OR = 2.07), Injury Severity Score (ISS) 10-15 (OR = 1.99), ISS > 15 (OR = 2.85), and Glasgow Coma Scale score < 9 (OR = 2.11) had increased odds. Results were similar for ultimate transport to a Level I or II center. Analyzing transport to a Level I, II, or III center demonstrated similar results except a Level III trauma center in county of residence was associated with increased odds (OR = 2.00 for initial and 2.21 for ultimate) of transport to a Level I, II, or III center.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified factors independently associated with failure to transport injured older adults to trauma centers in statewide data collected after adoption of geriatric triage criteria. Lack of a trauma center in the county of residence remained a factor even in analyses that included ultimate transport.

Is It Safe to Fly Patients with Penetrating Trauma in a Rural State?

BACKGROUND

There is limited data pertaining to the triage and transportation of patients with penetrating trauma in rural states. Large urban trauma centers have found rapid transport to be beneficial even when done by nonemergency medical staff. However, there is limited application to a rural state with only a single level 1 trauma center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This a retrospective observational study of 854 trauma patients transported by helicopter emergency services between 2009 and 2015 to the state's only level 1 trauma center.

RESULTS

After excluding patients with other injuries or lack of data, 854 patients underwent final analysis. Compared with penetrating trauma, blunt trauma had a significantly different chance of survival (92.0% versus 81.2%, P = 0.002) and a significantly different injury severity score (17 ± 12 versus 12 ± 9, P = 0.002). After controlling for blunt injuries, age, gender, injury severity score, tachycardia, tachypnea, hypotension, glasgow coma scale, and dispatch to hospital arrival time in multivariate analysis, blunt trauma had higher odds of survival than penetrating trauma (OR, 5.97; 95% CI, 2.52-14.12; P = <0.001 = 1). Gender, tachycardia, tachypnea, and dispatch to arrival time did not impact a patient's likelihood of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Penetrating trauma has a higher mortality when compared with blunt trauma in Helicopter Emergency Services transported patients in a rural state. Perhaps a new algorithm in the management of penetrating trauma would include hemorrhage control at a locoregional hospital before definitive care. Further study is required to understand the exact variables that lead to a higher mortality in penetrating trauma in a rural state.

Resource utilization and indications for helicopter transport of head-injured children

INTRODUCTION

Helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) have provided benefit for severely injured patients. However, HEMS are likely overused for the transportation of both adult and pediatric trauma patients. In this study, we aim to evaluate the degree of overuse of helicopter as a mode of transport for head-injured children. In addition, we propose criteria that can be used to determine if a particular patient is suitable for air versus ground transport.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified patients who were transported to our facility for head injuries. We included only those patients who were transported from another facility and who were seen by the neurosurgical service. We recorded a number of data points including age, gender, race, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), and intubation status. We also collected data on a number of imaging findings such as mass effect, edema, intracranial hemorrhage, and skull fractures. Patients undergoing emergent nonneurosurgical intervention were excluded.

RESULTS

Of the 373 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 116 (31.1%) underwent a neurosurgical procedure or died and were deemed appropriate for helicopter transport. The remaining 68.9% of patients survived their injuries without neurosurgical intervention and were deemed nonappropriate for helicopter transport. Multivariable logistic regression identified GCS 3-8 and/or presence of mass effect, edema, epidural hematoma (EDH), and open-depressed skull fracture as appropriate indications for helicopter transport.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients transported to our facility by helicopter survived their head injury without need for neurosurgical intervention. Only those patients meeting clinical (GCS 3-8) or radiographic (mass effect, edema, EDH, open-depressed skull fracture) criteria should be transported by air.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III (Diagnostic Study).

Analysis of Helicopter-Transported Trauma Patients at a Regional Trauma Center

Our medical center's regional helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) serves southeastern North Carolina. Judicious HEMS use is vital to ensure that the resource is available for critically injured patients and to reduce morbidity and mortality by providing timely access to definitive care. We reviewed HEMS use, clinical outcomes, and overtriage rates. The data included airlifted trauma patients from January 2004 to December 2012. Of 1210 total patients, 733 were flown directly from the scene (FS) and 477 from referring hospitals (FH). The HEMS catchment area was a 100-mile radius of our trauma center. FS patients were younger and sustained more motor vehicle collisions. FH patients were older and sustained more falls. FS patients required more hospital resources including longer ventilator requirements, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and hospital stay. For all HEMS patients, there was 92.2 per cent blunt injury, 47.5 per cent required Trauma I or II activation, 31 per cent required mechanical ventilation, and 50 per cent required ICU care. 59.5 per cent of HEMS trauma patients were critically injured (defined as requiring either immediate surgical intervention, immediate ICU admission, or immediate death). The overtriage rate was 1.8 per cent. The emergency department mortality rate was 2.3 per cent and the ultimate mortality rate was 7.5 per cent. Most of the airlifted trauma patients were critically injured, and therefore, HEMS transport was appropriate. However, overtriage was low, suggesting high incidence of undertriage. There should be a lower threshold for HEMS use for trauma patients in our region. More research is needed to determine ideal overtriage and undertriage rates.

Helicopter Transport From the Scene of Injury: Are There Improved Outcomes for Pediatric Trauma Patients?

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting data to support the routine use of helicopter transport (HT) for the transfer of trauma patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes for trauma patients transported via helicopter from the scene of injury to a regional pediatric trauma center.

METHODS

The institutional trauma registry was queried for trauma patients presenting from January 2000 through March 2012. Of 9119 patients, 1709 patients who presented from the scene were selected for further evaluation. This cohort was stratified into HT and ground transport (GT) for analysis. Associations between mode of transport and outcomes were estimated using odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals from multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Seven hundred twenty-five patients (42.4%) presented via HT, whereas 984 (57.6%) presented via GT. Patients arriving by HT had a higher Injury Severity Score, lower Glasgow Coma Scale, were less likely to undergo surgery within 3 hours, more likely to present after motorized trauma, and had longer intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS). Multivariate analysis controlling for Injury Severity Score, Glasgow Coma Scale, mechanism of injury, scene distance, and time to arrive to the hospital revealed that patients arriving by HT were more likely to have longer hospital LOS compared with those arriving by GT (odds ratios = 2.3, 95% confidence interval = 1.00-5.28, P = 0.049). However, no statistically significant association was observed for prehospital intubation, surgery within 3 hours, ICU admissions, or ICU LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Although patients arriving by helicopter are more severely injured and arrive from greater distances, when controlling for injuries, scene distance, and time to hospital arrival, only hospital LOS was significantly affected by HT.

Video-Enhanced Telemedicine Improves the Care of Acutely Injured Burn Patients in a Rural State

The acute care of burn patients is critical and can be a daunting experience for emergency personnel because of the scarcity of burn injuries. Telemedicine that incorporates a visual component can provide immediate expertise in the treatment and management of these injuries. The authors sought to evaluate the addition of video telemedicine to our current telephone burn transfer program. During a 2-year period, 282 patients, 59.4% of all burn patients transferred from outside hospitals, were enrolled in the study. In addition to the scripted call with the charge nurse (ChargeRN) and the accepting physician, nine hospitals also transmitted video images of the wounds before transfer as part of a store and forward telemedicine transfer program (77, 27.6%). The accuracy of burn size estimations (BSA burned) and management changes (fluid requirements, transfer mode, and final disposition) were analyzed between the telephones-only sites (T only) and the video-enhanced sites. Referringstaff participating in video-enhanced telemedicine were sent a Google survey assessing their experience the following day. The referring staff (Referringstaff) was correct in their burn assessment 20% of the time. Video assessment improved the ChargeRN BSA burned and resulted in more accurate fluid resuscitation (P = .030), changes in both transportation mode (P = .042), and disposition decisions (P = .20). The majority of the Referringstaff found that video-enhanced telemedicine helped them communicate with the burn staff more effectively (3.4 ± 0.37, scale 1-4). This study reports the successful implementation of video-enhanced telemedicine pilot project in a rural state. Video-enhanced telemedicine using a store and forward process improved burn size estimation and facilitated management changes. Although not quantitatively assessed, the low cost of the system coupled with the changes in transportation and disposition strongly suggests a decrease in healthcare costs associated with the addition of video to a telephone-only transfer program.

Comparing the Air Medical Prehospital Triage Score With Current Practice for Triage of Injured Patients to Helicopter Emergency Medical Services: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

Question

Is a selective triage strategy more cost-effective than current practices for determining which injured patients should be transported by helicopter vs ground ambulance to a trauma center?

Findings

In a nationally representative cohort using cost-effectiveness modeling, current helicopter triage practices have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $255 333 per quality-adjusted life-year compared with using the Air Medical Prehospital Triage score, which is significantly more than the generally accepted threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year for cost-effective medical interventions.

Meaning

Current helicopter triage practices are not cost-effective compared with the Air Medical Prehospital Triage score for determining helicopter vs ground transport for trauma patients.

Importance

Little evidence exists to guide helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) triage, and current practice is inefficient. The Air Medical Prehospital Triage (AMPT) score was developed to identify patients most likely to benefit from HEMS compared with ground EMS. To our knowledge, no studies have evaluated the potential effect on costs and outcomes of a more targeted HEMS triage strategy, such as the AMPT score.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of current practice compared with the AMPT score for HEMS scene triage of trauma patients.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A cost-effectiveness Markov model was developed for the US health care system to compare current practice with the AMPT score as HEMS scene triage strategies from the health care system perspective over a patient lifetime horizon. A base case was estimated using national data of patient characteristics from the National Trauma Databank from 2007 to 2012. Model inputs, including demographic information, health care costs, survival, and utility estimates, were derived from literature and national registries. Triage strategies were modeled as probability of HEMS transport. Multilevel logistic regression was used to evaluate survival probability between HEMS and ground EMS under the triage strategies. Costs considered included transport reimbursements, hospitalization, cost of health care in the first year postinjury, and annual cost of health care after the first year postinjury. Several sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate robustness of model assumptions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, with a threshold of $100 000 or less per quality-adjusted life-year defining cost-effectiveness.

Results

The base case had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $255 333 per quality-adjusted life-year for current practice compared with the AMPT score. Assuming 20% of patients have severe injuries and assuming HEMS only benefits these patients, current practice had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $176 686 per quality-adjusted life-year. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that current practice is inferior in 85% of iterations, only becoming favored when the cost-effectiveness threshold is greater than $310 000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

Conclusions and Relevance

Current practice is not cost-effective compared with the AMPT score for HEMS scene triage. The AMPT score was the preferred strategy across a range of model input values in sensitivity analyses. The AMPT score identifies patients most likely to benefit from HEMS while potentially reducing costs to the health care system and should be considered in air medical transport protocols for trauma patients.

Canceled to Be Called Back: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Canceled Helicopter Emergency Medical Service Scene Calls That Are Later Transferred to a Trauma Center

INTRODUCTION

In our trauma system, helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) can be requested to attend a scene call for an injured patient before arrival by land paramedics. Land paramedics can cancel this response if they deem it unnecessary. The purpose of this study is to describe the frequency of canceled HEMS scene calls that were subsequently transferred to 2 trauma centers and to assess for any impact on morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

Probabilistic matching was used to identify canceled HEMS scene call patients who were later transported to 2 trauma centers over a 48-month period. Registry data were used to compare canceled scene call patients with direct from scene patients.

RESULTS

There were 290 requests for HEMS scene calls, of which 35.2% were canceled. Of those canceled, 24.5% were later transported to our trauma centers. Canceled scene call patients were more likely to be older and to be discharged home from the trauma center without being admitted.

CONCLUSION

There is a significant amount of undertriage of patients for whom an HEMS response was canceled and later transported to a trauma center. These patients face similar morbidity and mortality as patients who are brought directly from scene to a trauma center.

Mode of Transport and Clinical Outcome in Rural Trauma: A Helicopter versus Ambulance Comparison

Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) is presumably an effective way of patient transport in rural trauma, yet the literature addressing its effectiveness is scarce. In this study, we compared the clinical outcome of rural trauma patients between Ground Emergency Medical Services (GEMS) and HEMS transportation from the beginning of 2006 to the end of 2012. Focus was placed on identifying factors associated with survival to discharge in these patients. Over the seven-year study period, 4492 patients met the inclusion criteria with 2414 patients (54%) being transferred by GEMS and 2078 patients (46%) being transferred by HEMS. In comparison with GEMS, patients transferred by HEMS were younger men who were admitted with a higher mean Injury Severity Score and a lower mean Glasgow Coma Score (all Ps < 0.0001). HEMS patients were more frequently intubated before arrival at the trauma center (32% vs 9%, P < 0.0001) and were more frequently transferred to the operating room from the emergency department (11% vs 5%, P < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, transfer by HEMS was associated with a significant increase in survival to discharge (odds ratio: 1.57, 95% confidence interval: 1.03–2.40, P = 0.036). Blunt injury, no intubation, and Glasgow Coma Score >8 were also associated with significantly improved odds of survival to discharge (all P < 0.0001). These findings show that although patients transferred by HEMS arrived in less favorable clinical conditions, HEMS transfer was associated with significantly higher odds of survival in rural trauma.

Assessing Field Triage Decisions and the International Classification Injury Severity Score (ICISS) at Predicting Outcomes of Trauma Patients

Florida considers the International Classification Injury Severity Score (ICISS) from hospital discharges within a geographic region in the apportionment of trauma centers (TCs). Patients with an ICISS <0.85 are considered to require triage to a TC, yet many are triaged to an emergency department (ED). We assess outcomes of those with an ICISS <0.85 by the actual triage decision of emergency medical services (EMS). From October 2011 to October 2013, 39,021 consecutive admissions with injury ICD-9 codes were analyzed. ICISS was calculated from the product of the survival risk ratios for a patient's three worst injuries. Outcomes were compared between patients with ICISS <0.85 either triaged to the ED or its separate, neighboring, free-standing TC at a large urban hospital. A total of 32,191 (83%) patients were triaged to the ED by EMS and 6,827 (17%) were triaged to the TC. Of these, 2544 had an ICISS <0.85, with 2145 (84%) being triaged to the TC and 399 (16%) to the ED. In these patients, those taken to the TC more often required admission, and those taken to the ED had better outcomes. When the confounders influencing triage to an ED or a TC are eliminated, those triaged by EMS to the ED rather than the TC had better overall outcomes. EMS providers better identified patients at risk for mortality than did the retrospective application of ICISS. ICISS <0.85 does not identify the absolute need for TC as EMS providers were able to appropriately triage a large portion of this population to the ED.

Development and Validation of the Air Medical Prehospital Triage Score for Helicopter Transport of Trauma Patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop and internally validate a triage score that can identify trauma patients at the scene who would potentially benefit from helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Although survival benefits have been shown at the population level, identification of patients most likely to benefit from HEMS transport is imperative to justify the risks and cost of this intervention.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of subjects undergoing scene HEMS or ground emergency medical services (GEMS) in the National Trauma Databank (2007-2012). Data were split into training and validation sets. Subjects were grouped by triage criteria in the training set and regression used to determine which criteria had a survival benefit associated with HEMS. Points were assigned to these criteria to develop the Air Medical Prehospital Triage (AMPT) score. The score was applied in the validation set to determine whether subjects triaged to HEMS had a survival benefit when actually transported by helicopter.

RESULTS

There were 2,086,137 subjects included. Criteria identified for inclusion in the AMPT score included GCS <14, respiratory rate <10 or >29, flail chest, hemo/pneumothorax, paralysis, and multisystem trauma. The optimal cutoff for triage to HEMS was ≥2 points. In subjects triaged to HEMS, actual transport by HEMS was associated with an increased odds of survival (AOR 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-1.36, P < 0.01). In subjects triaged to GEMS, actual transport mode was not associated with survival (AOR 1.04; 95% CI 0.97-1.11, P = 0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

The AMPT score identifies patients with improved survival following HEMS transport and should be considered in air medical triage protocols.

Mortality following helicopter versus ground transport of injured children

INTRODUCTION

Injured children may be transported to trauma centers by helicopter air ambulance (HAA); however, a benefit in outcomes to this expensive resource has not been consistently shown in the literature and there is concern that HAA is over-utilized. A study that adequately controls for selection biases in transport mode is needed to determine which injured children benefit from HAA. The purpose of this study was to determine if HAA impacts mortality differently in minimally and severely injured children and if there are predictors of over-triage of HAA in children that can be identified.

METHODS

Children ≤18 years of age transported by HAA or ground ambulance (GA) from scene to a trauma center were identified from the 2010-2011 National Trauma Data Bank. Analysis was stratified by Injury Severity Score (ISS) into low ISS (≤15) and high ISS (>15) groups. Following propensity score matching of HAA to GA patients, conditional multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine if transport mode independently impacted mortality in each stratum. Rates and predictors of over-triage of HAA were also determined.

RESULTS

Transport by HAA occurred in 8218 children (5574 low ISS, 2644 high ISS) and by GA in 35305 (30506 low ISS, 4799 high ISS). Overall mortality was greater in HAA patients (4.0 vs 1.4%, p<0.001). After propensity score matching, mortality was equivalent between HAA and GA for low ISS patients (0.2 vs 0.2%, p=0.82) but, for high ISS patients, mortality was lower in HAA (9.0 vs 11.1% p=0.014). On multivariable analysis, HAA was associated with decreased mortality in high ISS patients (OR=0.66, p=0.017) but not in low ISS patients (OR=1.13, p=0.73). Discharge within 24h of HAA transport occurred in 36.5% of low ISS patients versus 7.4% high ISS patients (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a national cohort adjusted for nonrandom assignment of transport mode, a survival benefit to HAA transport exists only for severely injured children with ISS >15. Many children with minor injuries are transported by helicopter despite frequent dismissal within 24h and no mortality benefit.

Outcomes after helicopter versus ground emergency medical services for major trauma--propensity score and instrumental variable analyses: a retrospective nationwide cohort study

Background

Because of a lack of randomized controlled trials and the methodological weakness of currently available observational studies, the benefits of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) over ground emergency medical services (GEMS) for major trauma patients remain uncertain. The aim of this retrospective nationwide cohort study was to compare the mortality of adults with serious traumatic injuries who were transported by HEMS and GEMS, and to analyze the effects of HEMS in various subpopulations.

Methods

Using the Japan Trauma Data Bank, we evaluated all adult patients who had an injury severity score ≥ 16 transported by HEMS or GEMS during the daytime between 2004 and 2014. We compared in-hospital mortality between patients transported by HEMS and GEMS using propensity score matching, inverse probability of treatment weighting and instrumental variable analyses to adjust for measured and unmeasured confounding factors.

Results

Eligible patients (n = 21,286) from 192 hospitals included 4128 transported by HEMS and 17,158 transported by GEMS. In the propensity score-matched model, there was a significant difference in the in-hospital mortality between HEMS and GEMS groups (22.2 vs. 24.5%, risk difference −2.3% [95% confidence interval, −4.2 to −0.5]; number needed to treat, 43 [95% confidence interval, 24 to 220]). The inverse probability of treatment weighting (20.8% vs. 23.9%; risk difference, −3.9% [95% confidence interval, −5.7 to −2.1]; number needed to treat, 26 [95% confidence interval, 17 to 48]) and instrumental variable analyses showed similar results (risk difference, −6.5% [95% confidence interval, −9.2 to −3.8]; number needed to treat, 15 [95% confidence interval, 11 to 27]). HEMS transport was significantly associated with lower in-hospital mortality after falls, compression injuries, severe chest injuries, extremity (including pelvic) injuries, and traumatic arrest on arrival to the emergency department.

Conclusions

HEMS was associated with a significantly lower mortality than GEMS in adult patients with major traumatic injuries after adjusting for measured and unmeasured confounders.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13049-016-0335-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Helicopter emergency medical rescue for the traumatized: experience in the metropolitan region of Campinas, Brazil

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the profile of patients served by the air medical rescue system in the Metropolitan Region of Campinas, evaluating: triage and mobilization criteria; response time; on-site care and transport time; invasive procedures performed in the Pre-Hospital Care (PHC); severity of patients; morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, descriptive study in which we analyzed medical records of patients rescued between July 2010 and December 2012. During this period, 242 victims were taken to the HC-Unicamp. Of the 242 patients, 22 were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

of the 220 cases evaluated, 173 (78.6%) were male, with a mean age of 32 years. Blunt trauma was the most prevalent (207 cases - 94.1%), motorcycle accidents being the most common mechanisms of injury (66 cases - 30%), followed by motor vehicle collisions (51 cases - 23.2%). The average response time was 10 ± 4 minutes and the averaged total pre-hospital time was 42 ± 11 minutes. The mean values of the trauma indices were: RTS = 6.2 ± 2.2; ISS = 19.2 ± 12.6; and TRISS = 0.78 ± 0.3. Tracheal intubation in the pre-hospital environment was performed in 77 cases (35%); 43 patients (19.5%) had RTS of 7.84 and ISSd"9, being classified as over-triaged. Of all patients admitted, the mortality was 15.9% (35 cases).

CONCLUSION

studies of air medical rescue in Brazil are required due to the investments made in the pre-hospital care in a country without an organized trauma system. The high rate of over-triage found highlights the need to improve the triage and mobilization criteria.

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.

Factors Associated with the Use of Helicopter Inter-facility Transport of Trauma Patients to Tertiary Trauma Centers within an Organized Rural Trauma System

OBJECTIVE

A review of the literature yielded little information regarding factors associated with the decision to use ground (GEMS) or helicopter (HEMS) emergency medical services for trauma patients transferred inter-facility. Furthermore, studies evaluating the impact of inter-facility transport mode on mortality have reported mixed findings. Since HEMS transport is generally reserved for more severely injured patients, this introduces indication bias, which may explain the mixed findings. Our objective was to identify factors at referring non-tertiary trauma centers (NTC) influencing transport mode decision.

METHODS

This was a case-control study of trauma patients transferred from a Level III or IV NTC to a tertiary trauma center (TTC) within 24-hours reported to the Oklahoma State Trauma Registry between 2005 and 2012. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine clinical and non-clinical factors associated with the decision to use HEMS.

RESULTS

A total of 7380 patients met the study eligibility. Of these, 2803(38%) were transported inter-facility by HEMS. Penetrating injury, prehospital EMS transport, severe torso injury, hypovolemic shock, and TBI were significant predictors (p<0.05) of HEMS use regardless of distance to a TTC. Association between HEMS use and male gender, Level IV NTC, and local ground EMS resources varied by distance from the TTC. Many HEMS transported patients had minor injuries and normal vital signs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that while distance remains the most influential factor associated with HEMS use, significant differences exist in clinical and non-clinical factors between patients transported by HEMS versus GEMS. To ensure comparability of study groups, studies evaluating outcome differences between HEMS and GEMS should take factors determining transport mode into account. The findings will be used to develop propensity scores to balance baseline risk between GEMS and HEMS patients for use in subsequent studies of outcomes.

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.

Prehospital Helicopter Air Ambulances Part 2: Utilization Criteria and Training

OBJECTIVES

The decision to request a helicopter air ambulance (HAA) is critical and complex. Emergency medical service (EMS) professionals must know how to appropriately and safely use HAA resources. We sought to describe important criteria for using HAA and the prevalence of HAA-related training among EMS professionals. Then, we identified characteristics associated with receiving training.

METHODS

We sent an electronic questionnaire to all nationally certified EMS professionals. We performed descriptive analyses and multivariable logistic regression modeling.

RESULTS

We received 15,366 responses. Nearly all respondents reported that time to nearest trauma center and mechanism of injury were important in their last decision to use a HAA. About two thirds received HAA safety training (66.7%), whereas 69.0% received HAA utilization training within the past 24 months. Nearly three fourths (74.2%) received training in at least 1 HAA-related topic. Providers working at advanced life support levels, fire-based services, agencies providing 911 response, or in rural communities had greater odds of having received HAA training, whereas women, members of minority ethic/racial groups, and those with higher weekly call volumes had decreased odds.

CONCLUSION

Although their decision-making criteria appear to include the major factors recommended within current evidence-based guidelines, many nationally certified EMS professionals had not received recent HAA training.

Does the use of dedicated dispatch criteria by Emergency Medical Services optimise appropriate allocation of advanced care resources in cases of high severity trauma? A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The deployment of Enhanced Care Teams (ECTs) capable of delivering advanced clinical interventions for patients at the scene of incidents is commonplace by Emergency Medical Services in most developed countries. It is unclear whether primary dispatch models for ECT resources are more efficient at targeting deployment to patients with severe trauma than secondary dispatch, following requests from EMS personnel at scene. The objective of this study was to review the evidence for primary and secondary models in the targeted dispatch of ECT resources to patients with severe traumatic injury.

METHODS

This review was completed in accordance with a protocol developed using the PRISMA guidelines. We conducted a search of the MEDLINE, EmBase, Web of Knowledge/Science databases and the Cochrane library, focussed on subject headings and keywords involving the dispatch of ECT resources by Emergency Medical Services. Design and results of each study were described. Heterogeneity in the design of the included studies precluded the completion of a meta-analysis. A narrative synthesis of the results therefore was performed.

RESULTS

Five hundred and forty-eight articles were screened, and 16 were included. Only one study compared the performance of the different models of dispatch. A non-statistically significant reduction in the length of time for HEMS resources to reach incident scenes of 4min was found when primary dispatch protocols were utilised compared to requests from EMS personnel at scene. No effect on mortality; severity of injury or proportion of patients admitted to intensive care was observed. The remaining studies examined the processes utilised within current primary dispatch models but did not perform any comparative analysis with existing secondary dispatch models.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identifies a lack of evidence supporting the role of primary dispatch models in targeting the deployment of Enhanced Care Teams to patients with severe injuries. It is therefore not possible to identify a model for ECT dispatch within pre-hospital systems that optimises resource utilisation. Further studies are required to assess the efficiency of systems utilised at each stage of the process used to dispatch Enhanced Care Team resources to incidents within regionalised pre-hospital trauma systems.

Prehospital helicopter transport and survival of patients with traumatic brain injury

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association of helicopter transport with survival of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), in comparison with ground emergency medical services (EMS).

BACKGROUND

Helicopter utilization and its effect on the outcomes of TBI remain controversial.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study involving patients with TBI who were registered in the National Trauma Data Bank between 2009 and 2011. Regression techniques with propensity score matching were used to investigate the association of helicopter transport with survival of patients with TBI, in comparison with ground EMS.

RESULTS

During the study period, there were 209,529 patients with TBI who were registered in the National Trauma Data Bank and met the inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 35,334 were transported via helicopters and 174,195 via ground EMS. For patients transported to level I trauma centers, 2797 deaths (12%) were recorded after helicopter transport and 8161 (7.8%) after ground EMS. Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated an association of helicopter transport with increased survival [OR (odds ratio), 1.95; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.81-2.10; absolute risk reduction (ARR), 6.37%]. This persisted after propensity score matching (OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.74-2.03; ARR, 5.93%). For patients transported to level II trauma centers, 1282 deaths (10.6%) were recorded after helicopter transport and 5097 (7.3%) after ground EMS. Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated an association of helicopter transport with increased survival (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.64-2.00; ARR 5.17%). This again persisted after propensity score matching (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.55-1.94; ARR, 4.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Helicopter transport of patients with TBI to level I and II trauma centers was associated with improved survival, in comparison with ground EMS.